The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
The Forward: "Human Biodiversity: The Pseudoscientific Racism of the Alt-Right"
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

From The Forward:

Human Biodiversity: the Pseudoscientific Racism of the Alt-Right
Ari Feldman August 5, 2016

There’s a piece of the “alt-right” puzzle of bigotry you need to know more about: “human biodiversity.”

An ideological successor to eugenics, human biodiversity (HBD) is, like eugenics (from the Greek words for “good” and “breeding”) primarily a euphemism. Ostensibly, HBD refers to the scientifically proven (and therefore apolitical) genetic differences between groups of humans. The term fuses biological and liberal language into a benign-sounding neologism, like “neurodiversity,” a key term within the autism rights movement.

But it is just pseudoscientific racism, updated for the Internet age.

“Human biodiversity” appropriates scientific authority by posing as an empirical, rational discourse on the genetically proven physical and mental variation between humans. It uses the language of genetics to underscore, for example, the prevalence of Mongolians in sumo wrestling, the IQ scores of black people or the inbreeding patterns of Ashkenazi Jews. The refrain of HBD bloggers and forum commenters is that the (gene-driven, according to them) dissimilarities they outline are “non-negligible” or “non-trivial” and have, accordingly, social policy implications. Though it has a rational, policy-wonk zing to it, that’s just Internet forum-ese for “you’re genetically distinct from us and should be treated differently.”

Recently, the conservative “journalist” Milo Yiannopoulos boosted awareness of the HBD proponents when he name-checked a couple of HBD gurus in his article “An Establishment Conservative’s Guide to the Alt-Right.” He brought the term human biodiversity — coined by Steve Sailer in the mid-90s — to a wider audience.

Actually, the term “human biodiversity” was coined by anthropologist Jonathan Marks in his 1995 book Human Biodiversity: Genes, Race, and History (Foundations of Human Behavior).

Sailer, a blogger for several conservative websites with racial preoccupations, including Taki’s Magazine, the Unz Review and VDARE.com, has said of human biodiversity (in an interview with the H.L. Mencken Club, one of 40 hate groups in Pennsylvania) that it’s both a field of study and a political movement, because it has to “fight for its right to exist.”

My shout out to the Beastie Boys starts at 3:32 in this video from 2009:

Q. Is HBD a political movement or is it a field of study?

A. At the moment it has to be a political movement as well as a field of study because it has to fight for its right to exist. My goal for human biodiversity is that someday it will help liberate the American mind enough where it doesn’t have to be a political movement anymore. It can just be a subject of great natural interest to humanity.

Back to The Forward:

The other writers in the HBD community are former journalists, science grad students and a lot of comment-section laymen. Sailer, who founded the Human Biodiversity Institute, maintains a blog at the Unz Review, writing about the dating prospects of Asian men and the inadequacies of gay men and lesbians, among other things.

… Elsewhere on the Internet, a woman calling herself “hbd chick” runs a wide-ranging personal blog on HBD; she seems particularly consumed by the inbreeding habits of Ashkenazi Jews and the genetic makeup of Europeans.

It would be polite to provide links to sites like HBD Chick, but I guess Feldman doesn’t want to be accused of providing hatelinks.

First, they came for HBD Chick, but I wasn’t a chick so I said nothing. Then they came for those who linked to HBD Chick, but I had carefully not linked to her so I said nothing. Then they came for everybody who knew she existed and … uh oh …

Though many in the HBD community are Internet autodidacts — people with little to no scientific training who spend their free time learning the scientific argot — some are trained scientists with an expertise in animal biology or statistics. One such writer, Razib Khan, a Ph.D. candidate at the University of California-Davis’s Department of Animal Science, has been writing about human biodiversity for many years. He briefly had a job at The New York Times as a writer for its Opinion section, before Gawker reported that he’d contributed to the virulently racist Taki’s Magazine and written to VDARE.com, an anti-immigrant website.

Steve Sailer and other HBD bloggers believe they present an accurate depiction of human genetics — especially population genetics, the study of how gene pools change over time, and behavioral genetics, the study of how genes are expressed. These two fields have been generating controversy for the better part of a century. One of the hallmarks of genetics research is that it produces data that are easy to sensationalize, such as IQ scores of black people (see: “The Bell Curve” controversy) or the supposed Khazarian origin of the Jewish people. In addition to obscuring the actual scientific consensus, these false conclusions have, in the former case, served as a license to discriminate against black people and, in the latter, provided “evidence” for those who say that Jews have no ancestral connection to the land of Israel.

The modern field of genetics has disavowed theories of human behavior that are all nature — i.e., based only on genes — just as sociologists and anthropologists have disavowed theories that are all nurture. The reality is somewhere in-between, where, for example, a genetic predisposition to asthma (more common among Jews) may be worsened by living in smoggy Mexico City or mitigated by moving to Phoenix. The science of that in-between is called epigenetics, the study of the environmental effect on gene expression.

Yet HBD blogs tend to skip the last 25 years of genetics, during which epigenetics supplanted the nature versus nurture debate. Human biodiversity is stuck at the moment when geneticists were able to show that distinct ethnic and geographical populations have distinct genomes and are therefore distinguishable from other groups (albeit under a microscope). The evidence of these genetic isolates is, for the HBD community, evidence of different races.

But the evidence that HBD proponents adduce shows only that different genetic populations are just that: different. That’s certainly not news to geneticists, and it’s rather intuitive for the rest of us. Yet on HBD blogs across the web, the data analyses of world-class geneticists are held up as evidence that races exist, and that these differences are, to varying degrees, worthy of social and legal regulation. Whereas their eugenicist predecessors might have wielded calipers to log the variances in skull circumference between individuals, adherents to human biodiversity justify their racism on the similarly shaky ground of genome variance.

These writers are, for the most part, long on “evidence” and short on policy:

Can’t have that! HBD aficionados need to become more like respectable pundits who are short on evidence and long on policy…

They seem to simply accumulate colorful charts and tables of raw genomic data as if a preponderance of graphics and spreadsheets proves the existence of races. There is no shortage of misguided policy proposals that harp on the pet obsessions of the HBD community. However, at least in the blogs and forums I examined, there was little discussion of what to do with the data of “human biodiversity.”

Ultimately, what’s most problematic about human biodiversity is not that it highlights differences between people. A commitment to pluralism is a commitment to diversity. The problem is the adherence to the totem of “race”: It is a word so slippery as to be meaningless, and the hatred it has inspired can in no way be scientifically vindicated. The weight of scientific evidence supports the reality of relative genetic difference, but not the essentialist divisions that form the basis for race theory — and the racist agenda of the alt-right.

The people who hate the word “race” might consider focusing their rage against institutions more influential than HBD bloggers. For example, the federal government spends billions to collect and make available Census data sorted by race; the New York Times uses the word “race” dozens of times per week; and the President of the United States entitled his autobiography Dreams from My Father: A Story of Race and Inheritance.

 
Hide 268 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. I wrote the following comment to the Forward article:

    “she [hbdchick] seems particularly consumed by the inbreeding habits of Ashkenazi Jews”

    I just checked hbdchick’s site and she has 25 posts tagged “Ashkenazi Jews” out of the hundreds she has written.

    So I wouldn’t really describe that being “consumed” – at least not any more so than this very publication: http://forward.com/culture/140894/may-you-live-until-120-dna-uncovers-secrets-to-je/

    It was removed. Sad!

    • Replies: @Harold
    Yes, that was revealing of the author not of hbd chick.
  2. H.L. Mencken Club, one of 40 hate groups in Pennsylvania

    The link mistakenly went to HBD Chick. Here maybe is the link you intended:

    http://www.phillymag.com/news/2015/03/19/hate-groups-pennsylvania-splc/

    My favs in the list are “radical traditional Catholicism” and “general hate.”

    • Replies: @Chrisnonymous
    I use my "general hate" decoder ring to read messages from the president...
    , @Kevin O'Keeffe

    My favs in the list are “radical traditional Catholicism” and “general hate.”
     
    That's my ideology. I am an advocate of general hate. We're a beleaguered faction, admittedly, but one day, we hope to spread general hatred across society. Will you join us in our noble struggle?
  3. Standard semantic obfuscation revolving around the word “race”, which isn’t a scientific classification in the first place. That’s what allows dumbshits to derail with “race is a social construct” when the topic is actually phenotypes.

    • Replies: @King George III
    "Race" isn't a scientific classification, but "subspecies" is.
    , @Mr. Anon
    "Standard semantic obfuscation revolving around the word “race”, which isn’t a scientific classification in the first place."

    "up" and "down" are not scientific classifications. They are none the less useful terms which are often used in scientific publications. There is nothing wrong with the concept of "race".
    , @415 reasons
    Yea that was basically a thousand words of gibberish. No one in the HBD sphere denies an interaction of genes and life experiences/environment. There is a false dichotomy between acknowledging that outcomes aren't 100% genetic and acknowledging that a lot of the structure in data about outcomes of different groups in American society is due to genetic differences between different groups of people.

    And as far as policy prescriptions? They're not very grand and they require no new government agencies: acknowledge that those differences in outcomes are basically impossible to change and quit obsessing about the victimization Olympics. There will never be "progress" towards ending "the gap" other than becoming Brazil.
  4. When you have intimate knowledge of a subject, it becomes glaringly obvious to you how much the media get it wrong when they report on it. Mostly it’s out of incompetence or laziness and not malice.

    In this case of this forward writer, he appears to be incompetent.

    • Replies: @Curle
    He has no interest in being competent. His employers aren't paying for the truth.
    , @Boomstick
    No, I don't think he's incompetent. There's enough skill displayed in the rhetoric to mark it down as malice. He repeatedly runs the same scams Stephen Jay Gould did, and the article reads like "Mismeasure of Man" in essay form.

    He repeatedly ties modern views of HBD to pre-scientific forms, such as phrenology. He conflates the recognition of racial differences with the need for public policy issues, in effect saying that if race differences are real then it must follow that Blacks must be segregated or denied the vote. It's a dressed up argumentum ad consequentiam.

    He lumps into the movement some camps that have little to do with HBD, such as that Khazar hypothesis people. The original Khazar hypothesis by Schomo Sand was not based on genetic analysis; Sand is a historian, not a geneticist, and is in fact critical of genetic studies, period.

    In 2010, when Harry Ostrer, a professor of genetics at the Albert Einstein College of Medicine, announced the results of a DNA study showing "powerful genetic markers of Jewish ancestry," Sand told Science Magazine that "Hitler would certainly have been very pleased."
     
    A geneticist, Eran Elhaik, argued for the Khazar hypothesis but as I recall he's very much in the minority. Are people who use genetics to argue for the Khazar thesis in the HBD camp, but those who use genetics to argue against it outside?
    , @AndrewR
    Incompetence and malice are not mutually exclusive...
    , @donut
    I've personally been intimately involved with three big stories . I would say that in the case of two of those stories ignorance and malice were the primary factors , with the third it was all laziness . In time I have come to believe that other than the sports scores nothing in the main stream media is to be believed .
  5. https://theconversation.com/can-genetics-explain-the-success-of-east-african-distance-runners-62586

    More than 10,000 athletes from 206 different nations will compete for glory in this year’s Olympic Games in Rio. But when it comes to distance running it’s likely that, as in previous years, the finals will be dominated by athletes from East African countries or those of East African heritage.

    Why do athletes from this one region of the world tend to have such extraordinary success in one sport? It’s often suggested that it must be down to genetic factors. This would seem a logical assumption, based on the number of Olympic medals won by athletes from a relatively localised geographical area with relatively limited resources to spend on training.

    As a result, it’s not surprising that a number of scientific studies over the past 15 years have attempted to answer this question. There is some evidence that the typical body type of East African distance runners – with long, slender legs – may contribute to an increased efficiency in these athletes, particularly at race pace. Yet the overall findings of these research studies have not identified genetic traits that could conclusively explain the success of East African distance runners.

    As elite sports performance is a complicated phenomenon, it is unlikely that athletic success will be the result of a single genetic factor. But it is possible that the success of these athletes could be down to a combination of interacting genes, which the latest genetic research is trying to discover.

  6. If you include the commenters, both iSteve and Taki’s are racist sites, but you can’t blame Steve and Taki for what their nuttiest commenters post.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    If you include the commenters, both iSteve and Taki’s are racist sites, but you can’t blame Steve and Taki for what their nuttiest commenters post.

    So racism = nutty?

    What do you find nutty about racism?
    , @Paul Walker Most beautiful man ever...
    "both iSteve and Taki’s are racist sites".
    You don't get out much do you?
    , @anonitron1
    I miss ThorDaddy, dude.
  7. Yet HBD blogs tend to skip the last 25 years of genetics, during which epigenetics supplanted the nature versus nurture debate.

    Whenever you read epigenetics being talked up like this, you know you are dealing with a blowhard and a clown.

    They seem to attribute magical qualities to Buzzwords.

  8. No tie-in with Derb ?

    Racist John Derbyshire Writes Most Racist Article Possible

    Certainly the author didn’t do enough research…

  9. IQ scores of black people (see: “The Bell Curve” controversy) or the supposed Khazarian origin of the Jewish people. In addition to obscuring the actual scientific consensus

    There need to be more liberals and event leftists who call out this bullshit. Even if you think that IQ differences are all environmental – scientific consensus – really?

  10. Steve,

    On occasion I offer the criticism that your outlook is ‘small.’ But you are never stupid. This Ari Feldman is stupid.

  11. @Mark Caplan

    H.L. Mencken Club, one of 40 hate groups in Pennsylvania


     

    The link mistakenly went to HBD Chick. Here maybe is the link you intended:

    http://www.phillymag.com/news/2015/03/19/hate-groups-pennsylvania-splc/

    My favs in the list are "radical traditional Catholicism" and "general hate."

    I use my “general hate” decoder ring to read messages from the president…

  12. Is this another example of an outpost defense?

  13. @Anatoly Karlin
    I wrote the following comment to the Forward article:

    “she [hbdchick] seems particularly consumed by the inbreeding habits of Ashkenazi Jews”

    I just checked hbdchick’s site and she has 25 posts tagged “Ashkenazi Jews” out of the hundreds she has written.

    So I wouldn’t really describe that being “consumed” – at least not any more so than this very publication: http://forward.com/culture/140894/may-you-live-until-120-dna-uncovers-secrets-to-je/

     

    It was removed. Sad!

    Yes, that was revealing of the author not of hbd chick.

  14. Uh oh, Steve!

    If Ari is mentioning you by name, it won’t be long before Heidi Beirich has you in her sights. She must be lonely now that Lawrence Auster is dead. I expect you’ll be getting one of her disconcertingly frisky emails inviting you to chat with her.

    I hope you’ll resist the gentlemanly impulse to keep her correspondence to yourself. It’s an election year and I can use all the laughs I can get.

    • Replies: @BB753
    I hope this old piece by blogger Hipster Racist about lonely Heidi will give you a laugh:

    https://eradica.wordpress.com/2013/06/03/50-pounds-of-heidi/
  15. People of different races are like different breeds of dogs. Some breeds of dogs are smarter than others.

  16. anon • Disclaimer says:

    When asked what his latest invention would be, ahmed said, ‘ another clock, a bigger clock, this time signed by me.’

    Does that sound like the dream of a fledgling tinkerer or of someone chasing reality tv fame?

    This kid is such a blatant fraud. He is so dumb. He must have not had a high enough IQ to cut it at the elite Qatari school. That’s why he’s back in the US. It’s funny how so many current events boil down to basic iSteve concepts — IQ, school tests, etc.

    • Replies: @anon
    When asked what his latest invention would be, ahmed said, ‘ another clock, a bigger clock, this time signed by me.’

    Does that sound like the dream of a fledgling tinkerer or of someone chasing reality tv fame?

    Oh, I don't know. If he changed his name to Seth Thomas, it could be a pretty good scam.

  17. “First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.”
    — Mahatma Gandhi

    These days, they also point at you and scream racism, at which point WE laugh at THEM.

    • Replies: @Boethiuss
    "These days, they also point at you and scream racism, at which point WE laugh at THEM."

    Sometimes. But sometimes we also drive ourselves into intellectual and political cul-de-sacs for absolutely refusing to acknowledge the obvious.

    I wonder, if you were to talk to some random youth in Baltimore who has charges pending for possession with intent to distribute 2 ounces of cocaine, how much he really thinks racism is the real reason behind his fate. My guess is, not much. And unless there was a tactical reason for him to avoid it, he'd probably admit it.

    But here, us enlightened commentariat at iSteve, whose median g is at least one standard deviation above the typical American black male and maybe more, we talk ourselves into all sorts of bullshit simply because we refuse to accept any contrary evidence.

    Some liberal writes in the NYT that black high school juniors score low on the SAT because the test is racist, and the commenters here cite chapter and verse to refute it until the cows come home. At the same time, we believe that all the polls showing Donald Trump losing the Presidency to be fabrications of the MSM, which to my mind is even stupider.
  18. You have to admit, Steve, some of the stuff on HBD posted in these environs can be poorly thought out, outlandish, or plain stupid. A difference between groups does not automatically provide evidence for HBD. You, as a smart individual with good analytical skills, can see this. Many of your commenters can’t. And your commenters come from a highly selected group with high mean IQ. One can only imagine what happens when 90 IQ dummies in Appalachia start getting into these ideas. Ideas like all Chinese people are merely grinds, and that white folk like themselves have the unique gift of “creativity”, while ignoring the fact that up until about 300 years ago Chinese art and craft were considered the most exquisite in the world.

    Take the Olympics, for instance. While I find it quite likely that Blacks have some genetic advantages in running, there are a lot of other racial quirks in the Olympics’ results whose mechanism aren’t so clear cut. Are Whites really good at swimming because of fat distribution and arm span? Or is it just the fact that it’s mostly middle-class or upper-class people who have good access to pools, and the training that’s required to become a world-class swimmer?

    Before Tiger Woods, I’m sure some “hbd-aware” redneck would have thought that Blacks (half-blacks, to be precise) were terrible at golf because of poor impulse control, or too many fast twitch muscle fibers, or poor hand-eye coordination. Sounds plausible, but I think the far more likely explanation is that blacks simply don’t play golf in anything approaching the numbers of Asians and Whites. Before that black chick won the gymnastics medal this year, I’m sure there were a bunch of people saying the same thing about heavy bone structure in blacks, and their unsuitability for the finesse of gymnastics. While ignoring the fact that most black chicks don’t do gymnastics at the same rate as Whites do.

    HBD is real, but the tendencies of idiots to run with their biases is equally real. Once HBD becomes more popular, you can rest assured that popular discourse on it will become so detached from reality that it will make today’s PC shibboleths seem like the apex of human rationality.

    Those who work on the HBD of sex differences, of course, are on more solid ground. This is Steven Pinker’s main argument in The Blank Slate, where he eschews analyzing racial differences in favor of sex differences. Granted, there are a lot of people out there who try to biologise sex differences which are highly culturally generated, but the sexists have the fact that men have an entire Y chromosome worth of difference going for them.

    • Replies: @Jason Liu
    Great comment. HBD is real, as it's nearly impossible for any two things in nature to be equals. But most of the HBD sphere is people overfitting statistics into their preconceived notions and making ridiculous generalizations.

    It's probably because HBD is formally shunned by academia, so people are basically grasping for anything. That needs to change.
    , @anon
    Before Tiger Woods, I’m sure some “hbd-aware” redneck would have thought that Blacks (half-blacks, to be precise) were terrible at golf because of poor impulse control, or too many fast twitch muscle fibers, or poor hand-eye coordination.

    Maybe, but without HBD blogs, dumb rednecks would have thought the same thing for dumber reasons.

    People seem to think that dumb rednecks would never come up with dumb ideas on their own, without people explaining to them the scientific facts.

    Should people not talk about facts, because dumb people will think dumb things? Isn't it better that they have some idea of the actual facts, instead of just thinking dumb things for no rational reason, like they would anyway?
    , @Hippopotamusdrome


    Are Whites really good at swimming because of fat distribution and arm span? Or is it just the fact that it’s mostly middle-class or upper-class people who have good access to pools, and the training that’s required to become a world-class swimmer?

     

    Every city and town in the Western world has public tax supported swimming pools that the poor have access too. In addition the poor attend the universal free and compulsory public schools that have swim teams. There are a myriad of scholarships and government funded programs to get poor blacks to attend college and their atheletics programs.


    Before Tiger Woods, I’m sure some “hbd-aware” redneck would have thought that Blacks (half-blacks, to be precise) were terrible at golf

     

    He is only 1/4 black. The 3/4 is mostly Asian an White.
    , @ben tillman

    HBD is real, but the tendencies of idiots to run with their biases is equally real. Once HBD becomes more popular, you can rest assured that popular discourse on it will become so detached from reality that it will make today’s PC shibboleths seem like the apex of human rationality.
     
    Popular discourse is presently completely detached from reality. If smart people are allowed to speak the truth and therefore are able to teach other smart people the truth, they will be able to teach the lesser lights at least some semblance of the truth.

    We currently have a situation in which the smartest of people are required to say the stupidest of things, which can only make the stupider more ignorant.

    And one more thing -- so what?

    , @Harold

    A difference between groups does not automatically provide evidence for HBD. You, as a smart individual with good analytical skills, can see this. Many of your commenters can’t.
     
    Name one.
    , @Chrisnonymous

    One can only imagine what happens when 90 IQ dummies in Appalachia start getting into these ideas.
     
    Don't worry. You can tell 90 IQ dummies there's no biodiversity relevant to golf because Tiger Woods. Case closed.
    , @unpc downunder
    Actually race differences often trump sex differences - especially in the education field. For example, East Asians females, on average, outperform white males in math and slaughter black males. White females, pay off their student loans faster than NAM males and have lower unemployment rates. And both white men and women have a far wider range of non-work related hobbies and interests than people of other races. How many pet shows and sci fi conventions do blacks and Asians put on?

    If anything, the HBD crowd are more prone to exaggerate sex differences and underestimate race differences.

    , @neutral
    You left out the most obvious one (gee I wonder why), that blacks always win the 100 sprints, no doubt you are going to say that its because of culture or poverty or some other stupid excuse like that, but then you are going to have to explain why dirt poor India is not producing these oppressed sprinters like the West African descended ones.
    , @bored identity
    thinkingaboutrat says:

    "....Before that black chick won the gymnastics medal this year, I’m sure there were a bunch of people saying the same thing about heavy bone structure in blacks, and their unsuitability for the finesse of gymnastics. While ignoring the fact that most black chicks don’t do gymnastics at the same rate as Whites do. ...."


    The real problem here is that in nowadays environment it doesn't take too much for one to be called plain stupid,90 IQ dummy in Appalachia,redneck,idiot ...

    Few years ago, Italian Gymnastics Federation spokesperson David Ciaralli was trying to defend a young national team athlete after she made a snarky comments about the Italians needed to have black skin to beat rivals like Simone Biles.

    At face value, the comment sounds tasteless and racist.

    But then , Ciaralli tried to clarify the context in which the unfortunate comment was made:

    She was referring to " a trend in gymnastics at this moment, which is going towards a technique that opens up new chances to athletes of color (well-known for power)” while penalizing the more artistic Eastern European style that allowed Russians and Romanians to dominate the sport for years."
     
    Could it be a case? Who knows.
    After all, a creative tempering with a rules and criteria to adopt to certain traits of the certain groups is something that totaly never happens in this country.

    That just reminded me of something called a firefighter exam.

    Oh,I know.

    You 're going to tell me how I'm ignoring the fact that most black chicks don’t do firefighting at the same rate as Whites do.
    Or is it just the fact that it’s mostly middle-class or upper-class people who have good access to fire hoses (damn Bull Connor!), and the training that’s required to become a world-class fire-chief?

    Anyway,instead of spirited debate among the experts , we had a usual situation of social justice grinding aparatus,( also well-known for power) being prestissimo activated to smear a miserable racist spokeperson:


    David Ciaralli defended Ferlito in a way that recalled statements that led to the firing of Dodgers’ general manager Al Campanis in 1987
     
    And then we got this unorthodox, gawkeresque piece of cognitive dissonance from an orthodox ex -gymnast that's just begging for a Steve's deconstruction:


    What is this belief based on? That's where Ciaralli's remarks about artistry come in.

    They are part of a larger ongoing conversation amongst coaches, athletes, judges, and fans as to the direction of the sport, on whether it moves in a more artistic direction or towards power and tricks, as though those are mutually exclusive categories. Most of these debates usually end with artistry supporters reminding everyone that the sport is called "artistic gymnastics," never mind that no one can agree what "artistry" in gymnastics means.

     
    http://deadspin.com/simone-biles-vs-the-racists-are-black-gymnasts-the-ne-1443998882
    , @iffen
    One can only imagine what happens when 90 IQ dummies in Appalachia start getting into these ideas

    One can understand why the article mentions commenters like you.
    , @WhatEvvs
    Excellent points.

    "and that white folk like themselves have the unique gift of “creativity”, while ignoring the fact that up until about 300 years ago Chinese art and craft were considered the most exquisite in the world."

    That one really gets on my nerves. The Japanese are incredibly creative. Anime, manga... Americans steal from these all the time. Japanese filmmakers (borrowing from Americnas, granted) have taken our ideas, refined them, and created many great movies. The whole deadpan action hero was taken from Japanese samurai flicks. Hunger Games was likely stolen from a Japanese book/movie franchise: Battle Royale. They also make great art films, such as Departures.

    I do think that "HBD" has a grain of truth, but that it's distorted wildly by the commenters here. Steve may be intelligent but his audience is hopeless.
    , @WhatEvvs
    "but the sexists have the fact that men have an entire Y chromosome worth of difference going for them."

    Here is an example of exactly the problem you were talking about: people who don't know a lot about genes, talking about genes.

    It's not only the fact that men have a Y chromosome, but that they lack the two that women have. The fact that women have two X's and men have only one, which they inherit from their mothers, is hugely important.

    In addition to being crudely reductionist on race, most HBD dudes, including Steve, are sad, nasty little butthurt misogynists. And I do mean misogynist in the real old fashioned sense of the word. I have read Sailer for years, and his sensitivity to the fact that women may be superior to men in certain ways is very revealing. I remember one post where a Chinese trainer said that women have superior pain tolerance to men. That may be true, it may not be - pain tolerance is subjective, but my gawd, the hurt feelings.
    , @Anon
    thinkingaboutreit: A difference between groups does not automatically provide evidence for HBD.

    A good null hypothesis is usually half and half, unless one of the groups has quickly diverged from the other in recent time (which fits with a lot of the "WEIRD" stuff), in which case you might have a stronger reason to believe it's not genetic, though still could be.

    ignoring the fact that up until about 300 years ago Chinese art and craft were considered the most exquisite in the world.

    I don't believe the creativity thing, but you don't want to go to the other end of the scale, and overfocus on the period in which Chinese civilization excelled the West, from around 500AD to 1500AD, exaggerating its length and its depth. It's a pretty short period in the grand scheme of history and pre-history.

    The creativity thing to me really seems like a gloss for the fact that the East Asians seem to like producing entertainment and art which is relaxing, calming, and pastel, or else formal, dutiful and stiff, or else garish, hedonistic and hyperactive, very rarely liking the sort of spirited, outgoing and excitable, but measured and realistic works that the Western mind seems to prefer. Also rarely actually like rocking the boat, personally. They do not exactly have the personality of the European Enlightenment, or Renaissance (more rarely than European ancestry folk do).

    Hard to argue that personality difference is not likely to be to a degree genetic.

    But that's not actually "creativity" (the ability to produce new ideas), it's still less the ability to innovate scientifically and mathematically.
  19. >>One of the hallmarks of genetics research is that it produces data that are easy to sensationalize, such as IQ scores of black people (see: “The Bell Curve” controversy) or the supposed Khazarian origin of the Jewish people. In addition to obscuring the actual scientific consensus, these false conclusions have, in the former case, served as a license to discriminate against black people and, in the latter, provided “evidence” for those who say that Jews have no ancestral connection to the land of Israel.<<

    No Ari Feldman, it is the HBD people and their genetic statistical research who have DISPROVEN the Khazarian theory on the origin of Europe's Jews.

    • Replies: @International Jew
    Yeah, I noticed that too; he gives two examples of genetic findings "gone wrong", but one is extremely true while the other is extremely false.
    , @WhatEvvs
    "No Ari Feldman, it is the HBD people and their genetic statistical research who have DISPROVEN the Khazarian theory on the origin of Europe's Jews."

    No they didn't. Geneticists did. I doubt that most of the people who comment here could tell me how many pairs of chromosomes a human being has without looking it up. And not one could explain the unique characteristics of X chromosome inheritance.
  20. or the supposed Khazarian origin of the Jewish people. In addition to obscuring the actual scientific consensus, these false conclusions have, in the former case, served as a license to discriminate against black people and, in the latter, provided “evidence” for those who say that Jews have no ancestral connection to the land of Israel.

    Maybe somebody should tell this guy that HBD actually shows that the Khazar hypothesis is wrong?

    The term fuses biological and liberal language into a benign-sounding neologism, like “neurodiversity,” a key term within the autism rights movement.

    Looks like Heinlein was overly optimistic regarding when the Crazy Years* would end…..

    *

    “Considerable technical advance during this period, accompanied by a gradual deterioration of mores, orientation, and social institutions, terminating in mass psychoses in the sixth decade, and the interregnum.”

  21. the H.L. Mencken Club, one of 40 hate groups in Pennsylvania)

    Hahahaha wut?

    One of the hallmarks of genetics research is that it produces data that are easy to sensationalize, such as IQ scores of black people (see: “The Bell Curve” controversy) or the supposed Khazarian origin of the Jewish people.

    Data that “is” easy to sensationalize. Decline of the Jews, so sad.

    Who are these “HBDers” who produce “sensationalized” data about the supposed Khazarian origin of the Jews? Because the “theory’s” biggest proponent to date is Arthur Koestler, a warm Jew who published it because he thought it good for the Jews (“Jews are diverse, not racialist,” yada yada yada).

    In addition to obscuring the actual scientific consensus, these false conclusions primarily promulgated by warm Jews have […] provided “evidence” for those who say that Jews have no ancestral connection to the land of Israel.

    FIFH.

    The modern field of genetics has disavowed theories of human behavior that are all nature — i.e., based only on genes — just as sociologists and anthropologists have disavowed theories that are all nurture.

    Weasel words. Yes, the field of genetics has disavowed biological determinism, and a handful of academics have distanced themselves from the environmentally determinist quackery known as the sociological and anthropological fields.

    Bah, TL;DR. It’s always the same lies in new packaging; rearranging the deck chairs on the sinking ship of environmental determinism.

  22. First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.

    I think we’ve entered the laughing phase.

    • LOL: BenKenobi
  23. @Jason Liu
    Standard semantic obfuscation revolving around the word "race", which isn't a scientific classification in the first place. That's what allows dumbshits to derail with "race is a social construct" when the topic is actually phenotypes.

    “Race” isn’t a scientific classification, but “subspecies” is.

  24. Steve, he’s not saying you’re wrong. He’s saying the implications are terrifying to him.

    There is no shortage of misguided policy proposals that harp on the pet obsessions of the HBD community. However, at least in the blogs and forums I examined, there was little discussion of what to do with the data of “human biodiversity.”

    If you remember, quite a while back, there was a writer for, I believe SLATE (or Salon?), who had read about biodiversity, and concluded that, scientifically, it had to be true.

    His first question about his newfound discovery was “what do we DO with it?”

    Shortly afterwards, he was converged upon by not only the Slate readership, but also his editors, and the people who sign his checks. He recanted and apologized.

    In debates I’ve had with others personally on the issue, those who give me some consideration have inevitably stared at me with nervous eyes and said “okay, if you’re right, what DO we do with this information?”

    If I recall, your response was using it for better social policy for the improvement of the lives of everyone, which… just isn’t enough for them. They need more assurance that it doesn’t end in concentration camps, enslavement of the lessers, or it’s a non-starter, science be damned.

    Until a better view of the social outcome of HBD being widely accepted is clear and believable to them, they ain’t gonna play. They’ll play AROUND it, like Ari just did. He’ll give you a little bird whistle, but until you convince him of roses on the other side, he ain’t playin’.

    • Replies: @Broski
    You believe correctly. He's a Jewish fellow named Saletan, who learned a lesson in the politics of the whole thing.
    , @ben tillman

    His first question about his newfound discovery was “what do we DO with it?”
     
    The first and most obvious thing you do is stop punishing the innocent who were convicted on false pretenses.
    , @gda
    "Until a better view of the social outcome of HBD being widely accepted is clear and believable to them, they ain’t gonna play"

    Its not real difficult for intelligent open-minded adults to grasp just exactly how ignoring the reality of HBD has negatively impacted the US for the past 50 years. The key word here is "open-minded".

    However, for progressives, identity politics trump facts every day of the week. Think of the Muslim Brotherhood. To Obama and his ilk they are natural allies - they're "progressive", they're usually brown, they've been oppressed - what's not to like?

    The fact that the Muslim Brotherhood encourages misogyny, offing gays, and other such unpleasant cultural nasties (and seem unable/unwilling to discourage the loonier, more blood-thirsty elements of their cult) is simply conveniently overlooked. To Obama they're "our kind of people".

    "They need more assurance that it doesn’t end in concentration camps, enslavement of the lessers, or it’s a non-starter, science be damned."

    It's a non-starter because it contradicts the very essence of their beliefs. To admit HBD was correct would be to admit that pretty much your whole life is based on a false premise. And they're just not ready to go there.
    , @carol
    I'd think HBD would make one a more critical thinker when assessing the latest Fabulous New Program designed to erase the achievement gap.
    , @Harry Baldwin
    They need more assurance that it doesn’t end in concentration camps, enslavement of the lessers, or it’s a non-starter, science be damned.

    That's crediting them with the best possible motives. Maybe they just don't want to see everything on which they've based they're worldview, everything that makes them the good guys and their opponents the bad guys, proved wrong.
    , @ben tillman

    They need more assurance that it doesn’t end in concentration camps, enslavement of the lessers, or it’s a non-starter, science be damned.
     
    Isn't it funny then that they don't need assurances that the prevailing ideology won't end in concentration camps, enslavement of the betters, etc.?
  25. It’s sort of unfair to class someone like hbdchick with figures like Sailer or Razib Khan. hbdchick is a nice person but not really erudite or sharp enough to be classed with them.

    • Replies: @ben tillman

    It’s sort of unfair to class someone like hbdchick with figures like Sailer or Razib Khan. hbdchick is a nice person but not really erudite or sharp enough to be classed with them.
     
    Funny -- I feel the same way about Razib being mentioned with Steve.
    , @Bill
    Razib: sharper than hbdchick
    , @NOTA
    There are ideas and conversations hbd chick has introduced that are both informative and would never have been raised by Steve. There is room for lots of people following their interests, thinking about things, and discussing them.
  26. anon • Disclaimer says:

    Yet on HBD blogs across the web, the data analyses of world-class geneticists are held up as evidence that races exist, and that these differences are, to varying degrees, worthy of social and legal regulation.

    I can’t recall a single time where Steve or hbd chick ever talked about any form of legal regulation, and I don’t even think that “social regulation” really exists.

    Also:

    “The reality is somewhere in-between, where, for example, a genetic predisposition to asthma (more common among Jews) may be worsened by living in smoggy Mexico City or mitigated by moving to Phoenix. The science of that in-between is called epigenetics, ”

    This doesn’t actually seem like an example of “epigenetics”, does it? Maybe I’m wrong, but being in a place that’s more triggering to asthma isn’t actually changing your gene expression, is it? It’s just triggering the actual condition. Like, getting stung by a bee might trigger your bee allergy if you had one, but your allergy hasn’t disappeared if you just never get stung by a bee.

    Or maybe not. I don’t know. I just know that that article was so filled with buzzwords like “problematic” and “virulently” that I think I need to lie down for awhile.

    • Replies: @Emblematic
    That was my favorite bit. Takimag isn't just plain racist, it's "virulently racist"!

    I also love the tone of collegial knowing concern. As if the writer and the audience are each bluffing each other along the lines of: "Of course we all know this is all just pseudo something 19th century something, buts it's necessary to cast our eyes over it because, well, it's troubling what wrong things some people are thinking". If they couldn't rely on this kind of non-contact dismissal they'd be utterly outgunned.
  27. Don’t you get the feeling from time to time that the biggest hate group of all is the Democratic Party ?

  28. I dunno, methinks Mr. Feldman understands exactly that HBD is true, and wants to let the Jewish Daily Forward’s readers know so, too. Hence, it is “a piece of the ‘alt-right’ puzzle of bigotry you need to know more about.” Obviously, he can’t say it’s true in the Forward, or that would be another useful footnote for future reference, a la Saletan’s admission of many years ago. In fairness, he does link to you, Razib, and HBD Chick toward the top of the article, which has probably just created a thousand or more new, Jewish HBD realists. Unfortunately, said realists may be dishonest about it, as we can assume Gould, Lewontin, and their ilk have been. Do some people just not care, at all, about lying?

    Sailer, who founded the Human Biodiversity Institute, maintains a blog at the Unz Review, writing about the dating prospects of Asian men and the inadequacies of gay men and lesbians, among other things.

    LOL!

    PS, something humorous (hopefully this won’t be enough to out me to the Mossad, but I’m sure Google has already told them about us all): The ad at the top of the Forward was for something called JScreen, which screens Jewish people for (almost always neurological, I wonder why) Jewish recessive genetic disorders! LOLOLOLOL!

    For more: https://jscreen.org . In fairness, though, I have to wonder whether that chick in JScreen’s picture is a Shiksa.

    • Replies: @Jim Don Bob
    Damn! I must have missed the part about "the inadequacies of gay men and lesbians". I'm gonna have to go search the archives.
    , @IHTG

    which has probably just created a thousand or more new, Jewish HBD realists
     
    Do that many people read the Forward?
    , @Brutusale
    I had to giggle a the pop-up that encouraged me to get "the Jewish take on the news!". I guess we're all so much the same that we're different.

    I found it heartening that nobody in the comment section was defending Feldman.

  29. @Jason Liu
    Standard semantic obfuscation revolving around the word "race", which isn't a scientific classification in the first place. That's what allows dumbshits to derail with "race is a social construct" when the topic is actually phenotypes.

    “Standard semantic obfuscation revolving around the word “race”, which isn’t a scientific classification in the first place.”

    “up” and “down” are not scientific classifications. They are none the less useful terms which are often used in scientific publications. There is nothing wrong with the concept of “race”.

  30. @Jean Cocteausten
    If you include the commenters, both iSteve and Taki's are racist sites, but you can't blame Steve and Taki for what their nuttiest commenters post.

    If you include the commenters, both iSteve and Taki’s are racist sites, but you can’t blame Steve and Taki for what their nuttiest commenters post.

    So racism = nutty?

    What do you find nutty about racism?

    • Replies: @Jean Cocteausten

    What do you find nutty about racism?
     
    You're right; I am identifying being nutty with being racist and I will concede that not all racists are nutty.

    My concern is this: Almost every iSteve post draws at least a few juvenile comments that almost everybody would consider racist and that add nothing to the discussion. It may feel good to post that sort of thing, but all it does is make it easier for e.g. the Forward to portray Steve as a crackpot, which he most assuredly is not.

    Now, there are many other posts on iSteve that most people would consider racist, but which are nevertheless true and should be read by everyone. But too many of the first kind of post means nobody will stick around to read the second kind of post.
  31. http://forward.com/articles/170925/hacking-jdate-to-find-the-perfect-jewish-hubby/&#8221;

    The Forward seems to cater to people who are highly concerned with genetics and racial/ethnic affiliation.

  32. If science can prove that, for instance, black people are statistically likely to be less intelligent and more violent than white people, I will believe it. If however, some commenter says that Joe Blow is black therefore he is stupid and violent I will know that commenter is a fool or has an ax to grind. HBD is as HBD does.

    • Replies: @anon
    If however, some commenter says that Joe Blow is black therefore he is stupid and violent I will know that commenter is a fool or has an ax to grind. HBD is as HBD does.

    And if some supposedly educated Jewish guy writing for a Jewish magazine says HBD is bogus, without ever taking the time to actually acquaint himself with the topic, and starts throwing around accusations like "hate groups", I'll know he has an ax to grind.

  33. @yowza
    Steve, he's not saying you're wrong. He's saying the implications are terrifying to him.

    There is no shortage of misguided policy proposals that harp on the pet obsessions of the HBD community. However, at least in the blogs and forums I examined, there was little discussion of what to do with the data of “human biodiversity.”
     
    If you remember, quite a while back, there was a writer for, I believe SLATE (or Salon?), who had read about biodiversity, and concluded that, scientifically, it had to be true.

    His first question about his newfound discovery was "what do we DO with it?"

    Shortly afterwards, he was converged upon by not only the Slate readership, but also his editors, and the people who sign his checks. He recanted and apologized.

    In debates I've had with others personally on the issue, those who give me some consideration have inevitably stared at me with nervous eyes and said "okay, if you're right, what DO we do with this information?"

    If I recall, your response was using it for better social policy for the improvement of the lives of everyone, which... just isn't enough for them. They need more assurance that it doesn't end in concentration camps, enslavement of the lessers, or it's a non-starter, science be damned.

    Until a better view of the social outcome of HBD being widely accepted is clear and believable to them, they ain't gonna play. They'll play AROUND it, like Ari just did. He'll give you a little bird whistle, but until you convince him of roses on the other side, he ain't playin'.

    You believe correctly. He’s a Jewish fellow named Saletan, who learned a lesson in the politics of the whole thing.

    • Replies: @dr kill
    Yes, and the public carpet crawl and foot-kissing he suffered was very instructive to the other citizens of Proggnation. As I recall , it went on for some time.
  34. @thinkingabout it
    You have to admit, Steve, some of the stuff on HBD posted in these environs can be poorly thought out, outlandish, or plain stupid. A difference between groups does not automatically provide evidence for HBD. You, as a smart individual with good analytical skills, can see this. Many of your commenters can't. And your commenters come from a highly selected group with high mean IQ. One can only imagine what happens when 90 IQ dummies in Appalachia start getting into these ideas. Ideas like all Chinese people are merely grinds, and that white folk like themselves have the unique gift of "creativity", while ignoring the fact that up until about 300 years ago Chinese art and craft were considered the most exquisite in the world.

    Take the Olympics, for instance. While I find it quite likely that Blacks have some genetic advantages in running, there are a lot of other racial quirks in the Olympics' results whose mechanism aren't so clear cut. Are Whites really good at swimming because of fat distribution and arm span? Or is it just the fact that it's mostly middle-class or upper-class people who have good access to pools, and the training that's required to become a world-class swimmer?

    Before Tiger Woods, I'm sure some "hbd-aware" redneck would have thought that Blacks (half-blacks, to be precise) were terrible at golf because of poor impulse control, or too many fast twitch muscle fibers, or poor hand-eye coordination. Sounds plausible, but I think the far more likely explanation is that blacks simply don't play golf in anything approaching the numbers of Asians and Whites. Before that black chick won the gymnastics medal this year, I'm sure there were a bunch of people saying the same thing about heavy bone structure in blacks, and their unsuitability for the finesse of gymnastics. While ignoring the fact that most black chicks don't do gymnastics at the same rate as Whites do.

    HBD is real, but the tendencies of idiots to run with their biases is equally real. Once HBD becomes more popular, you can rest assured that popular discourse on it will become so detached from reality that it will make today's PC shibboleths seem like the apex of human rationality.

    Those who work on the HBD of sex differences, of course, are on more solid ground. This is Steven Pinker's main argument in The Blank Slate, where he eschews analyzing racial differences in favor of sex differences. Granted, there are a lot of people out there who try to biologise sex differences which are highly culturally generated, but the sexists have the fact that men have an entire Y chromosome worth of difference going for them.

    Great comment. HBD is real, as it’s nearly impossible for any two things in nature to be equals. But most of the HBD sphere is people overfitting statistics into their preconceived notions and making ridiculous generalizations.

    It’s probably because HBD is formally shunned by academia, so people are basically grasping for anything. That needs to change.

  35. anon • Disclaimer says:
    @thinkingabout it
    You have to admit, Steve, some of the stuff on HBD posted in these environs can be poorly thought out, outlandish, or plain stupid. A difference between groups does not automatically provide evidence for HBD. You, as a smart individual with good analytical skills, can see this. Many of your commenters can't. And your commenters come from a highly selected group with high mean IQ. One can only imagine what happens when 90 IQ dummies in Appalachia start getting into these ideas. Ideas like all Chinese people are merely grinds, and that white folk like themselves have the unique gift of "creativity", while ignoring the fact that up until about 300 years ago Chinese art and craft were considered the most exquisite in the world.

    Take the Olympics, for instance. While I find it quite likely that Blacks have some genetic advantages in running, there are a lot of other racial quirks in the Olympics' results whose mechanism aren't so clear cut. Are Whites really good at swimming because of fat distribution and arm span? Or is it just the fact that it's mostly middle-class or upper-class people who have good access to pools, and the training that's required to become a world-class swimmer?

    Before Tiger Woods, I'm sure some "hbd-aware" redneck would have thought that Blacks (half-blacks, to be precise) were terrible at golf because of poor impulse control, or too many fast twitch muscle fibers, or poor hand-eye coordination. Sounds plausible, but I think the far more likely explanation is that blacks simply don't play golf in anything approaching the numbers of Asians and Whites. Before that black chick won the gymnastics medal this year, I'm sure there were a bunch of people saying the same thing about heavy bone structure in blacks, and their unsuitability for the finesse of gymnastics. While ignoring the fact that most black chicks don't do gymnastics at the same rate as Whites do.

    HBD is real, but the tendencies of idiots to run with their biases is equally real. Once HBD becomes more popular, you can rest assured that popular discourse on it will become so detached from reality that it will make today's PC shibboleths seem like the apex of human rationality.

    Those who work on the HBD of sex differences, of course, are on more solid ground. This is Steven Pinker's main argument in The Blank Slate, where he eschews analyzing racial differences in favor of sex differences. Granted, there are a lot of people out there who try to biologise sex differences which are highly culturally generated, but the sexists have the fact that men have an entire Y chromosome worth of difference going for them.

    Before Tiger Woods, I’m sure some “hbd-aware” redneck would have thought that Blacks (half-blacks, to be precise) were terrible at golf because of poor impulse control, or too many fast twitch muscle fibers, or poor hand-eye coordination.

    Maybe, but without HBD blogs, dumb rednecks would have thought the same thing for dumber reasons.

    People seem to think that dumb rednecks would never come up with dumb ideas on their own, without people explaining to them the scientific facts.

    Should people not talk about facts, because dumb people will think dumb things? Isn’t it better that they have some idea of the actual facts, instead of just thinking dumb things for no rational reason, like they would anyway?

    • Replies: @Discordiax
    Pretty sure, pre-Tiger, dumb rednecks thought blacks were bad at golf because they couldn't afford club memberships.

    Ask Sailer, there used to be a bunch of black golf pros who grew up with part-time jobs as caddies.
  36. @WorkingClass
    If science can prove that, for instance, black people are statistically likely to be less intelligent and more violent than white people, I will believe it. If however, some commenter says that Joe Blow is black therefore he is stupid and violent I will know that commenter is a fool or has an ax to grind. HBD is as HBD does.

    If however, some commenter says that Joe Blow is black therefore he is stupid and violent I will know that commenter is a fool or has an ax to grind. HBD is as HBD does.

    And if some supposedly educated Jewish guy writing for a Jewish magazine says HBD is bogus, without ever taking the time to actually acquaint himself with the topic, and starts throwing around accusations like “hate groups”, I’ll know he has an ax to grind.

  37. Spare us charts and evidence and data, because math is hard.

  38. @Anonymous
    It's sort of unfair to class someone like hbdchick with figures like Sailer or Razib Khan. hbdchick is a nice person but not really erudite or sharp enough to be classed with them.

    It’s sort of unfair to class someone like hbdchick with figures like Sailer or Razib Khan. hbdchick is a nice person but not really erudite or sharp enough to be classed with them.

    Funny — I feel the same way about Razib being mentioned with Steve.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    Perhaps Razib and HBD Chick feel that way about me!
    , @Anonymous
    Well that's because it's personal with you. You were part of that MR crowd that had that feud with Razib and GNXP about a decade ago. I'm not a big Razib fan myself but he's quite sharp and erudite.
  39. @anon
    Yet on HBD blogs across the web, the data analyses of world-class geneticists are held up as evidence that races exist, and that these differences are, to varying degrees, worthy of social and legal regulation.

    I can't recall a single time where Steve or hbd chick ever talked about any form of legal regulation, and I don't even think that "social regulation" really exists.

    Also:

    "The reality is somewhere in-between, where, for example, a genetic predisposition to asthma (more common among Jews) may be worsened by living in smoggy Mexico City or mitigated by moving to Phoenix. The science of that in-between is called epigenetics, "

    This doesn't actually seem like an example of "epigenetics", does it? Maybe I'm wrong, but being in a place that's more triggering to asthma isn't actually changing your gene expression, is it? It's just triggering the actual condition. Like, getting stung by a bee might trigger your bee allergy if you had one, but your allergy hasn't disappeared if you just never get stung by a bee.

    Or maybe not. I don't know. I just know that that article was so filled with buzzwords like "problematic" and "virulently" that I think I need to lie down for awhile.

    That was my favorite bit. Takimag isn’t just plain racist, it’s “virulently racist”!

    I also love the tone of collegial knowing concern. As if the writer and the audience are each bluffing each other along the lines of: “Of course we all know this is all just pseudo something 19th century something, buts it’s necessary to cast our eyes over it because, well, it’s troubling what wrong things some people are thinking”. If they couldn’t rely on this kind of non-contact dismissal they’d be utterly outgunned.

  40. @Fidelios Automata
    "First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win."
    -- Mahatma Gandhi

    These days, they also point at you and scream racism, at which point WE laugh at THEM.

    “These days, they also point at you and scream racism, at which point WE laugh at THEM.”

    Sometimes. But sometimes we also drive ourselves into intellectual and political cul-de-sacs for absolutely refusing to acknowledge the obvious.

    I wonder, if you were to talk to some random youth in Baltimore who has charges pending for possession with intent to distribute 2 ounces of cocaine, how much he really thinks racism is the real reason behind his fate. My guess is, not much. And unless there was a tactical reason for him to avoid it, he’d probably admit it.

    But here, us enlightened commentariat at iSteve, whose median g is at least one standard deviation above the typical American black male and maybe more, we talk ourselves into all sorts of bullshit simply because we refuse to accept any contrary evidence.

    Some liberal writes in the NYT that black high school juniors score low on the SAT because the test is racist, and the commenters here cite chapter and verse to refute it until the cows come home. At the same time, we believe that all the polls showing Donald Trump losing the Presidency to be fabrications of the MSM, which to my mind is even stupider.

    • Replies: @Broski

    "But here, us enlightened commentariat at iSteve, whose median g is at least one standard deviation above the typical American black male and maybe more . . ."

     

    So you think the average IQ around here is 100? Or you don't know much about IQs and SD? Either way, one gets the impression you're new to these hidden corners of the interwebs.
    , @thinkingabout it
    Very true. I keep seeing commenters come up with outrageous statements like "Donald trump is going to get the largest share of the black vote of any Republican candidate in the last 50 years!".
    And then we have multiple actual polls showing blacks backing Hillary like 99 to 1. The altright was attractive to me primarily because it had less groupthink and bias than the mainstream, but as our popularity grows that no longer seems to be the case.
    , @ben tillman

    But here, us enlightened commentariat at iSteve, whose median g is at least one standard deviation above the typical American black male and maybe more....
     
    Maybe?


    Some liberal writes in the NYT that black high school juniors score low on the SAT because the test is racist, and the commenters here cite chapter and verse to refute it until the cows come home. At the same time, we believe that all the polls showing Donald Trump losing the Presidency to be fabrications of the MSM, which to my mind is even stupider.
     
    Which says a lot about the quality of your mind.

    We can observe Black intellectual deficiencies in all sorts of ways other than looking at SAT scores. Accordingly, we can reasonably conclude that a difference in test scores is not due to a "racist" test.

    Meanwhile, we also know that the MSM will fabricate anything, which means it's entirely reasonable to suspect that the media and allied pollsters will fabricate polling data.
  41. @yowza
    Steve, he's not saying you're wrong. He's saying the implications are terrifying to him.

    There is no shortage of misguided policy proposals that harp on the pet obsessions of the HBD community. However, at least in the blogs and forums I examined, there was little discussion of what to do with the data of “human biodiversity.”
     
    If you remember, quite a while back, there was a writer for, I believe SLATE (or Salon?), who had read about biodiversity, and concluded that, scientifically, it had to be true.

    His first question about his newfound discovery was "what do we DO with it?"

    Shortly afterwards, he was converged upon by not only the Slate readership, but also his editors, and the people who sign his checks. He recanted and apologized.

    In debates I've had with others personally on the issue, those who give me some consideration have inevitably stared at me with nervous eyes and said "okay, if you're right, what DO we do with this information?"

    If I recall, your response was using it for better social policy for the improvement of the lives of everyone, which... just isn't enough for them. They need more assurance that it doesn't end in concentration camps, enslavement of the lessers, or it's a non-starter, science be damned.

    Until a better view of the social outcome of HBD being widely accepted is clear and believable to them, they ain't gonna play. They'll play AROUND it, like Ari just did. He'll give you a little bird whistle, but until you convince him of roses on the other side, he ain't playin'.

    His first question about his newfound discovery was “what do we DO with it?”

    The first and most obvious thing you do is stop punishing the innocent who were convicted on false pretenses.

    • Agree: Harold
  42. @Jean Cocteausten
    If you include the commenters, both iSteve and Taki's are racist sites, but you can't blame Steve and Taki for what their nuttiest commenters post.

    “both iSteve and Taki’s are racist sites”.
    You don’t get out much do you?

  43. @ben tillman

    It’s sort of unfair to class someone like hbdchick with figures like Sailer or Razib Khan. hbdchick is a nice person but not really erudite or sharp enough to be classed with them.
     
    Funny -- I feel the same way about Razib being mentioned with Steve.

    Perhaps Razib and HBD Chick feel that way about me!

    • Replies: @BenKenobi
    Gosh darn it, Steve. You're a heckuva guy!
    , @NickG
    Razib is a good thinker but a crap writer - his stuff is impenetrable without a lot of work, and I for one, just can't be arsed. JayMan and HBD chick are easy to read, comprehend and imbibe, Razib isn't. And Razib is something of a rude prick, which doesn't help.

    He would be alot better with an attitude upgrade (and I'm not looking for mister fluffy, Steve is turbo sarcastic, yet has no edges whatsoever), he would be well advised to imbibe and take to heart Steven Pinker's A sense of style.

  44. anon • Disclaimer says:
    @anon
    When asked what his latest invention would be, ahmed said, ' another clock, a bigger clock, this time signed by me.'

    Does that sound like the dream of a fledgling tinkerer or of someone chasing reality tv fame?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nmWrpKhn9_c

    This kid is such a blatant fraud. He is so dumb. He must have not had a high enough IQ to cut it at the elite Qatari school. That's why he's back in the US. It's funny how so many current events boil down to basic iSteve concepts -- IQ, school tests, etc.

    When asked what his latest invention would be, ahmed said, ‘ another clock, a bigger clock, this time signed by me.’

    Does that sound like the dream of a fledgling tinkerer or of someone chasing reality tv fame?

    Oh, I don’t know. If he changed his name to Seth Thomas, it could be a pretty good scam.

    • LOL: Buffalo Joe
  45. @thinkingabout it
    You have to admit, Steve, some of the stuff on HBD posted in these environs can be poorly thought out, outlandish, or plain stupid. A difference between groups does not automatically provide evidence for HBD. You, as a smart individual with good analytical skills, can see this. Many of your commenters can't. And your commenters come from a highly selected group with high mean IQ. One can only imagine what happens when 90 IQ dummies in Appalachia start getting into these ideas. Ideas like all Chinese people are merely grinds, and that white folk like themselves have the unique gift of "creativity", while ignoring the fact that up until about 300 years ago Chinese art and craft were considered the most exquisite in the world.

    Take the Olympics, for instance. While I find it quite likely that Blacks have some genetic advantages in running, there are a lot of other racial quirks in the Olympics' results whose mechanism aren't so clear cut. Are Whites really good at swimming because of fat distribution and arm span? Or is it just the fact that it's mostly middle-class or upper-class people who have good access to pools, and the training that's required to become a world-class swimmer?

    Before Tiger Woods, I'm sure some "hbd-aware" redneck would have thought that Blacks (half-blacks, to be precise) were terrible at golf because of poor impulse control, or too many fast twitch muscle fibers, or poor hand-eye coordination. Sounds plausible, but I think the far more likely explanation is that blacks simply don't play golf in anything approaching the numbers of Asians and Whites. Before that black chick won the gymnastics medal this year, I'm sure there were a bunch of people saying the same thing about heavy bone structure in blacks, and their unsuitability for the finesse of gymnastics. While ignoring the fact that most black chicks don't do gymnastics at the same rate as Whites do.

    HBD is real, but the tendencies of idiots to run with their biases is equally real. Once HBD becomes more popular, you can rest assured that popular discourse on it will become so detached from reality that it will make today's PC shibboleths seem like the apex of human rationality.

    Those who work on the HBD of sex differences, of course, are on more solid ground. This is Steven Pinker's main argument in The Blank Slate, where he eschews analyzing racial differences in favor of sex differences. Granted, there are a lot of people out there who try to biologise sex differences which are highly culturally generated, but the sexists have the fact that men have an entire Y chromosome worth of difference going for them.

    Are Whites really good at swimming because of fat distribution and arm span? Or is it just the fact that it’s mostly middle-class or upper-class people who have good access to pools, and the training that’s required to become a world-class swimmer?

    Every city and town in the Western world has public tax supported swimming pools that the poor have access too. In addition the poor attend the universal free and compulsory public schools that have swim teams. There are a myriad of scholarships and government funded programs to get poor blacks to attend college and their atheletics programs.

    Before Tiger Woods, I’m sure some “hbd-aware” redneck would have thought that Blacks (half-blacks, to be precise) were terrible at golf

    He is only 1/4 black. The 3/4 is mostly Asian an White.

    • Replies: @thinkingabout it
    Having access to pools or scholarships is not the only issue. If access were all that mattered, given the extensive affirmative action program in the US, every black would be a theoretical physicist. It's more about culture and what people actually do in real life. You can't make judgements about blacks' genetic swimming ability based on Olympic results, if they don't go for swimming in any large numbers or with any passion. So any HBD deductions you make are invalid, plain bad science.

    Genes, culture, access to facilities, and intensive training - they are all equally important. And unless you hold the other three close to constant, you cannot just flippantly attribute every difference in outcome to genes. Obviously, you can't create complete equality in culture, facilities and training, but it still seems farfetched to make genetic inferences when comparing countries like the US to countries like Morocco on Olympic performance.

    Having spent years and years in multiple Asian countries, I can say with confidence that Americans are far more involved in sporting and leisure activities than people from those countries. There are large swathes of the world where no one thinks that hanging out in a swimming pool is a good way to spend an afternoon. On the other hand every Tom, Dick and Harry in the States seems to go into eruptions of joy when someone says the words "Pool party".

    That's why I think the best HBD arguments are made when people from a poor country do inordinately well at some sport, especially if the sport is not something that is overwhelmingly popular in their country. Even with that, the sample sizes are too small to draw good conclusions. For instance, India dominated field hockey in the first half of the 20th century. Pakistan dominated squash for several years. They both suck in both sports these days. What changed? Certainly not the genetics. Not nutrition and training, those have only gotten better. One can't even attribute much to culture here, since these sports were never too popular in those countries to begin with. Sometimes things just happen randomly, read Nassim Taleb's Fooled by Randomness.
  46. @thinkingabout it
    You have to admit, Steve, some of the stuff on HBD posted in these environs can be poorly thought out, outlandish, or plain stupid. A difference between groups does not automatically provide evidence for HBD. You, as a smart individual with good analytical skills, can see this. Many of your commenters can't. And your commenters come from a highly selected group with high mean IQ. One can only imagine what happens when 90 IQ dummies in Appalachia start getting into these ideas. Ideas like all Chinese people are merely grinds, and that white folk like themselves have the unique gift of "creativity", while ignoring the fact that up until about 300 years ago Chinese art and craft were considered the most exquisite in the world.

    Take the Olympics, for instance. While I find it quite likely that Blacks have some genetic advantages in running, there are a lot of other racial quirks in the Olympics' results whose mechanism aren't so clear cut. Are Whites really good at swimming because of fat distribution and arm span? Or is it just the fact that it's mostly middle-class or upper-class people who have good access to pools, and the training that's required to become a world-class swimmer?

    Before Tiger Woods, I'm sure some "hbd-aware" redneck would have thought that Blacks (half-blacks, to be precise) were terrible at golf because of poor impulse control, or too many fast twitch muscle fibers, or poor hand-eye coordination. Sounds plausible, but I think the far more likely explanation is that blacks simply don't play golf in anything approaching the numbers of Asians and Whites. Before that black chick won the gymnastics medal this year, I'm sure there were a bunch of people saying the same thing about heavy bone structure in blacks, and their unsuitability for the finesse of gymnastics. While ignoring the fact that most black chicks don't do gymnastics at the same rate as Whites do.

    HBD is real, but the tendencies of idiots to run with their biases is equally real. Once HBD becomes more popular, you can rest assured that popular discourse on it will become so detached from reality that it will make today's PC shibboleths seem like the apex of human rationality.

    Those who work on the HBD of sex differences, of course, are on more solid ground. This is Steven Pinker's main argument in The Blank Slate, where he eschews analyzing racial differences in favor of sex differences. Granted, there are a lot of people out there who try to biologise sex differences which are highly culturally generated, but the sexists have the fact that men have an entire Y chromosome worth of difference going for them.

    HBD is real, but the tendencies of idiots to run with their biases is equally real. Once HBD becomes more popular, you can rest assured that popular discourse on it will become so detached from reality that it will make today’s PC shibboleths seem like the apex of human rationality.

    Popular discourse is presently completely detached from reality. If smart people are allowed to speak the truth and therefore are able to teach other smart people the truth, they will be able to teach the lesser lights at least some semblance of the truth.

    We currently have a situation in which the smartest of people are required to say the stupidest of things, which can only make the stupider more ignorant.

    And one more thing — so what?

  47. How does HBD explain the wide range of IQ within an ethnic group? Same question with physical attributes. Once there is such a wide gap will not the smart ones break off into their own group or be the ones who survive a famine?

    • Replies: @International Jew
    Group solidarity. If you had a below-average child would you push him out to sea on an ice floe?
    , @anon
    How does HBD explain the wide range of IQ within an ethnic group?

    It doesn't need to. That's natural variance that nobody of any ideological background denies.

    Once there is such a wide gap will not the smart ones break off into their own group


    Given enough time, sure. That's what Charles Murray's "Coming Apart" was about.

    be the ones who survive a famine?

    It would help you survive a famine, sure. But, then, ruthlessness and willingness to engage in physical violence to take what you need would too.

    Ideally, given enough intelligence, it would prevent most famines from happening in the first place, so you might never find out.
    , @yowza

    How does HBD explain the wide range of IQ within an ethnic group? Same question with physical attributes. Once there is such a wide gap will not the smart ones break off into their own group or be the ones who survive a famine?
     
    Google "bell curve," and be amazed! Once you understand it, it will change your world.
    Reality is awesome!
    , @Broski
    HBD doesn't explain intragroup IQ range. Basic, basic, 101 level standard trait distributions do. Hence, the title "The Bell Curve."

    And there isn't a gap intragroup, there is a spectrum. There will be a gap between two people, but people in the group filling the spectrum.

    Once there is such a wide gap will not the smart ones break off into their own group or be the ones who survive a famine?

     

    The real thrust of Charles Murray's work is assortative mating by IQ, which has only become ubiquitous during the meritocratic professional era of the past 50 or so years. You may find his discussions of that instructive.

    In brief answer to your question, they won't break off, but they'll screw the dumbs by facilitating things like, oh, globalization to send away the dumbs' jobs or bring in other, cheaper dumbs to mow their lawns, while they and their spouses go off to their doctor/lawyer/professor/business exec jobs.
    , @Clathrus
    Would you say that the difference in height between men and women cannot be genetic? After all, there is such a wide (and overlapping) range.
    , @another fred

    How does HBD explain the wide range of IQ within an ethnic group? Same question with physical attributes. Once there is such a wide gap will not the smart ones break off into their own group or be the ones who survive a famine?
     
    There has to be high positive selection pressure. There is evidence (only correlation at this time) that some of the genes that confer higher intelligence carry with them deleterious effects (the need for eyeglasses, Tay-Sachs, etc.) and a larger brain has a higher caloric demand. For two examples, in an environment where calories are usually obtained without much planning, the positive pressure for a larger brain would be lower; and to a hunter good eyesight has high value that would select against a gene that confers intelligence with the price of poorer eyesight.
    , @iffen
    Once there is such a wide gap will not the smart ones break off into their own group or be the ones who survive a famine?

    That's what is taking place now.
  48. @Daniel H
    >>One of the hallmarks of genetics research is that it produces data that are easy to sensationalize, such as IQ scores of black people (see: “The Bell Curve” controversy) or the supposed Khazarian origin of the Jewish people. In addition to obscuring the actual scientific consensus, these false conclusions have, in the former case, served as a license to discriminate against black people and, in the latter, provided “evidence” for those who say that Jews have no ancestral connection to the land of Israel.<<

    No Ari Feldman, it is the HBD people and their genetic statistical research who have DISPROVEN the Khazarian theory on the origin of Europe's Jews.

    Yeah, I noticed that too; he gives two examples of genetic findings “gone wrong”, but one is extremely true while the other is extremely false.

  49. @Steve Richter
    How does HBD explain the wide range of IQ within an ethnic group? Same question with physical attributes. Once there is such a wide gap will not the smart ones break off into their own group or be the ones who survive a famine?

    Group solidarity. If you had a below-average child would you push him out to sea on an ice floe?

    • Replies: @Expletive Deleted
    This . Is. Sparta!

    Although IIRC they eventually ran out of actual Spartans due to this pickiness.
  50. anon • Disclaimer says:
    @Steve Richter
    How does HBD explain the wide range of IQ within an ethnic group? Same question with physical attributes. Once there is such a wide gap will not the smart ones break off into their own group or be the ones who survive a famine?

    How does HBD explain the wide range of IQ within an ethnic group?

    It doesn’t need to. That’s natural variance that nobody of any ideological background denies.

    Once there is such a wide gap will not the smart ones break off into their own group

    Given enough time, sure. That’s what Charles Murray’s “Coming Apart” was about.

    be the ones who survive a famine?

    It would help you survive a famine, sure. But, then, ruthlessness and willingness to engage in physical violence to take what you need would too.

    Ideally, given enough intelligence, it would prevent most famines from happening in the first place, so you might never find out.

    • Replies: @Steve Richter

    It doesn’t need to. That’s natural variance that nobody of any ideological background denies.
     
    just seems that in a hunter gather society people are going to mate within the group without much regard to intelligence. Strength, courage, deviousness, manual dexterity, disease resistance, being sexy, all sorts of traits will be decisive in who mates with who. And yet hunter gather groups like Africans do show wide ranges of IQ. Just as wide a range as Whites and Asians.
  51. @Boethiuss
    "These days, they also point at you and scream racism, at which point WE laugh at THEM."

    Sometimes. But sometimes we also drive ourselves into intellectual and political cul-de-sacs for absolutely refusing to acknowledge the obvious.

    I wonder, if you were to talk to some random youth in Baltimore who has charges pending for possession with intent to distribute 2 ounces of cocaine, how much he really thinks racism is the real reason behind his fate. My guess is, not much. And unless there was a tactical reason for him to avoid it, he'd probably admit it.

    But here, us enlightened commentariat at iSteve, whose median g is at least one standard deviation above the typical American black male and maybe more, we talk ourselves into all sorts of bullshit simply because we refuse to accept any contrary evidence.

    Some liberal writes in the NYT that black high school juniors score low on the SAT because the test is racist, and the commenters here cite chapter and verse to refute it until the cows come home. At the same time, we believe that all the polls showing Donald Trump losing the Presidency to be fabrications of the MSM, which to my mind is even stupider.

    “But here, us enlightened commentariat at iSteve, whose median g is at least one standard deviation above the typical American black male and maybe more . . .”

    So you think the average IQ around here is 100? Or you don’t know much about IQs and SD? Either way, one gets the impression you’re new to these hidden corners of the interwebs.

    • Replies: @Boethiuss
    "So you think the average IQ around here is 100? Or you don’t know much about IQs and SD? Either way, one gets the impression you’re new to these hidden corners of the interwebs."

    At least, maybe more? Come on, I'm trying to avoid minutae here. In any event, the "smarter" we supposedly are, the less excuse we have.
  52. @Boethiuss
    "These days, they also point at you and scream racism, at which point WE laugh at THEM."

    Sometimes. But sometimes we also drive ourselves into intellectual and political cul-de-sacs for absolutely refusing to acknowledge the obvious.

    I wonder, if you were to talk to some random youth in Baltimore who has charges pending for possession with intent to distribute 2 ounces of cocaine, how much he really thinks racism is the real reason behind his fate. My guess is, not much. And unless there was a tactical reason for him to avoid it, he'd probably admit it.

    But here, us enlightened commentariat at iSteve, whose median g is at least one standard deviation above the typical American black male and maybe more, we talk ourselves into all sorts of bullshit simply because we refuse to accept any contrary evidence.

    Some liberal writes in the NYT that black high school juniors score low on the SAT because the test is racist, and the commenters here cite chapter and verse to refute it until the cows come home. At the same time, we believe that all the polls showing Donald Trump losing the Presidency to be fabrications of the MSM, which to my mind is even stupider.

    Very true. I keep seeing commenters come up with outrageous statements like “Donald trump is going to get the largest share of the black vote of any Republican candidate in the last 50 years!”.
    And then we have multiple actual polls showing blacks backing Hillary like 99 to 1. The altright was attractive to me primarily because it had less groupthink and bias than the mainstream, but as our popularity grows that no longer seems to be the case.

    • Replies: @former darfur
    Blacks have never voted 99% any particular way because if nothing else they tend to make mistakes and pull the wrong lever. Seventy to ninety percent margins are typical with blacks: much higher than 95 indicates vote fraud since at least five percent will either screw up or get a wild hair at the last minute.

    Trump probably will get a few percent higher percentage of the black vote than would be otherwise expected because of his pimpin' lifestyle and perceived great wealth. It would have to be a very, very tight race for that to matter.

    It would be interesting to turn the question around and ask: what's the least lopsided the black results have ever been in a state or congressional election, and why. Has there ever been a fifty-fifty black vote? And what were its circumstances?
    , @Discordiax
    Well, in defense of the "blacks for Trump" thesis, as of a while ago
    1. "High est black vote since 1970" means something like 16%.
    2. Trump could have been expected to hit that based on style, nationalism and black-latino/black-muslim tension.
    3. It assumed that Trump had some kind of a plan.
  53. @anon
    When you have intimate knowledge of a subject, it becomes glaringly obvious to you how much the media get it wrong when they report on it. Mostly it's out of incompetence or laziness and not malice.

    In this case of this forward writer, he appears to be incompetent.

    He has no interest in being competent. His employers aren’t paying for the truth.

  54. @Steve Richter
    How does HBD explain the wide range of IQ within an ethnic group? Same question with physical attributes. Once there is such a wide gap will not the smart ones break off into their own group or be the ones who survive a famine?

    How does HBD explain the wide range of IQ within an ethnic group? Same question with physical attributes. Once there is such a wide gap will not the smart ones break off into their own group or be the ones who survive a famine?

    Google “bell curve,” and be amazed! Once you understand it, it will change your world.
    Reality is awesome!

  55. @Steve Richter
    How does HBD explain the wide range of IQ within an ethnic group? Same question with physical attributes. Once there is such a wide gap will not the smart ones break off into their own group or be the ones who survive a famine?

    HBD doesn’t explain intragroup IQ range. Basic, basic, 101 level standard trait distributions do. Hence, the title “The Bell Curve.”

    And there isn’t a gap intragroup, there is a spectrum. There will be a gap between two people, but people in the group filling the spectrum.

    Once there is such a wide gap will not the smart ones break off into their own group or be the ones who survive a famine?

    The real thrust of Charles Murray’s work is assortative mating by IQ, which has only become ubiquitous during the meritocratic professional era of the past 50 or so years. You may find his discussions of that instructive.

    In brief answer to your question, they won’t break off, but they’ll screw the dumbs by facilitating things like, oh, globalization to send away the dumbs’ jobs or bring in other, cheaper dumbs to mow their lawns, while they and their spouses go off to their doctor/lawyer/professor/business exec jobs.

    • Replies: @Expletive Deleted
    " ..while they and their spouses go off to their doctor/lawyer/professor/business exec jobs" and join their priceless spergy intellectual talents (the only kind which get rewarded nowadays) together to have a couple of autistic spectrum kids. For which they'll place the blame on vaccination, or some such UMC boogeyman.
    Unsupervised assortative mating of the clerical&professional classes, in the the last century and the beginning of this, is underdiscussed IMO.
  56. Ooft! Ari Feldman is one hostile, aggressive fellow. No need to present a reasoned argument when you can just attack, attack, attack.

    Trouble is, people will find their interest piqued by his screed, come here (and to HBD Chick’s blog, and elsewhere) and find that here actually do not be dragons, but some pretty interesting material.

    Bad luck, Ari! You’re undoing your own “good” work.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    "and find that here actually do not be dragons…."

    Not to disagree with the gist of your post, but there do be dragons here. Metaphorically speaking--and what else is the myth of a knight mounting his steed and riding forth to do battle with a fire-breathing, hellish, devouring demon--what Sailor and others are doing when they take on the reigning dogma of those who hold the Megaphone is tantamount to slaying the proverbial dragon. It is a battle between a seemingly outgunned lone man armed with little more than his courage against a terrifying, far more powerful fire-breathing beast (our press).

    But the beast's power turns out to be illusory in the face of true courage. As in Campbell's Hero with a Thousand Faces and Jung's archetype of the Hero, the protagonist must act with complete belief in himself in spite of the seeming hopelessness of his task. With this and aid from a Muse--always an inspiring woman such as she who bears the scales of Justice or bare-breasted Liberty leading the people--he will succeed.

    Van Gogh said that "just when you feel like giving up in despair is the very moment that you must push forward, for that is when the breakthrough occurs" (paraphrased). Courage is not how you behave when sitting in your favorite chair in the comfort of your living room, but how you respond when all hope is lost.
    , @iffen
    Trouble is, people will find their interest piqued by his screed, come here (and to HBD Chick’s blog, and elsewhere)

    They might end up HBD-woke.
  57. If you had a below-average child would you push him out to sea on an ice floe?

    Suppose a fetus is aborted because tests indicate the child would be born with severe congenital defects. Isn’t that the same as pushing a below-average child out to sea on an ice floe? Perhaps abortion is less painful than freezing. Can’t say that I’ve had either experience, so I dunno.

    How does HBD explain the wide range of IQ within an ethnic group?

    You do not understand the basic concept of statistical distributions. A “wide range of IQ within an ethnic group” does not subdivide that group into two discrete subsets.

  58. @thinkingabout it
    You have to admit, Steve, some of the stuff on HBD posted in these environs can be poorly thought out, outlandish, or plain stupid. A difference between groups does not automatically provide evidence for HBD. You, as a smart individual with good analytical skills, can see this. Many of your commenters can't. And your commenters come from a highly selected group with high mean IQ. One can only imagine what happens when 90 IQ dummies in Appalachia start getting into these ideas. Ideas like all Chinese people are merely grinds, and that white folk like themselves have the unique gift of "creativity", while ignoring the fact that up until about 300 years ago Chinese art and craft were considered the most exquisite in the world.

    Take the Olympics, for instance. While I find it quite likely that Blacks have some genetic advantages in running, there are a lot of other racial quirks in the Olympics' results whose mechanism aren't so clear cut. Are Whites really good at swimming because of fat distribution and arm span? Or is it just the fact that it's mostly middle-class or upper-class people who have good access to pools, and the training that's required to become a world-class swimmer?

    Before Tiger Woods, I'm sure some "hbd-aware" redneck would have thought that Blacks (half-blacks, to be precise) were terrible at golf because of poor impulse control, or too many fast twitch muscle fibers, or poor hand-eye coordination. Sounds plausible, but I think the far more likely explanation is that blacks simply don't play golf in anything approaching the numbers of Asians and Whites. Before that black chick won the gymnastics medal this year, I'm sure there were a bunch of people saying the same thing about heavy bone structure in blacks, and their unsuitability for the finesse of gymnastics. While ignoring the fact that most black chicks don't do gymnastics at the same rate as Whites do.

    HBD is real, but the tendencies of idiots to run with their biases is equally real. Once HBD becomes more popular, you can rest assured that popular discourse on it will become so detached from reality that it will make today's PC shibboleths seem like the apex of human rationality.

    Those who work on the HBD of sex differences, of course, are on more solid ground. This is Steven Pinker's main argument in The Blank Slate, where he eschews analyzing racial differences in favor of sex differences. Granted, there are a lot of people out there who try to biologise sex differences which are highly culturally generated, but the sexists have the fact that men have an entire Y chromosome worth of difference going for them.

    A difference between groups does not automatically provide evidence for HBD. You, as a smart individual with good analytical skills, can see this. Many of your commenters can’t.

    Name one.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    Comments on blogs are a good place to try out hypotheses that might or might not be right.
  59. @yowza
    Steve, he's not saying you're wrong. He's saying the implications are terrifying to him.

    There is no shortage of misguided policy proposals that harp on the pet obsessions of the HBD community. However, at least in the blogs and forums I examined, there was little discussion of what to do with the data of “human biodiversity.”
     
    If you remember, quite a while back, there was a writer for, I believe SLATE (or Salon?), who had read about biodiversity, and concluded that, scientifically, it had to be true.

    His first question about his newfound discovery was "what do we DO with it?"

    Shortly afterwards, he was converged upon by not only the Slate readership, but also his editors, and the people who sign his checks. He recanted and apologized.

    In debates I've had with others personally on the issue, those who give me some consideration have inevitably stared at me with nervous eyes and said "okay, if you're right, what DO we do with this information?"

    If I recall, your response was using it for better social policy for the improvement of the lives of everyone, which... just isn't enough for them. They need more assurance that it doesn't end in concentration camps, enslavement of the lessers, or it's a non-starter, science be damned.

    Until a better view of the social outcome of HBD being widely accepted is clear and believable to them, they ain't gonna play. They'll play AROUND it, like Ari just did. He'll give you a little bird whistle, but until you convince him of roses on the other side, he ain't playin'.

    “Until a better view of the social outcome of HBD being widely accepted is clear and believable to them, they ain’t gonna play”

    Its not real difficult for intelligent open-minded adults to grasp just exactly how ignoring the reality of HBD has negatively impacted the US for the past 50 years. The key word here is “open-minded”.

    However, for progressives, identity politics trump facts every day of the week. Think of the Muslim Brotherhood. To Obama and his ilk they are natural allies – they’re “progressive”, they’re usually brown, they’ve been oppressed – what’s not to like?

    The fact that the Muslim Brotherhood encourages misogyny, offing gays, and other such unpleasant cultural nasties (and seem unable/unwilling to discourage the loonier, more blood-thirsty elements of their cult) is simply conveniently overlooked. To Obama they’re “our kind of people”.

    “They need more assurance that it doesn’t end in concentration camps, enslavement of the lessers, or it’s a non-starter, science be damned.”

    It’s a non-starter because it contradicts the very essence of their beliefs. To admit HBD was correct would be to admit that pretty much your whole life is based on a false premise. And they’re just not ready to go there.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Its not real difficult for intelligent open-minded adults to grasp just exactly how ignoring the reality of HBD has negatively impacted the US for the past 50 years.

    Please give some examples.
  60. @Hippopotamusdrome


    Are Whites really good at swimming because of fat distribution and arm span? Or is it just the fact that it’s mostly middle-class or upper-class people who have good access to pools, and the training that’s required to become a world-class swimmer?

     

    Every city and town in the Western world has public tax supported swimming pools that the poor have access too. In addition the poor attend the universal free and compulsory public schools that have swim teams. There are a myriad of scholarships and government funded programs to get poor blacks to attend college and their atheletics programs.


    Before Tiger Woods, I’m sure some “hbd-aware” redneck would have thought that Blacks (half-blacks, to be precise) were terrible at golf

     

    He is only 1/4 black. The 3/4 is mostly Asian an White.

    Having access to pools or scholarships is not the only issue. If access were all that mattered, given the extensive affirmative action program in the US, every black would be a theoretical physicist. It’s more about culture and what people actually do in real life. You can’t make judgements about blacks’ genetic swimming ability based on Olympic results, if they don’t go for swimming in any large numbers or with any passion. So any HBD deductions you make are invalid, plain bad science.

    Genes, culture, access to facilities, and intensive training – they are all equally important. And unless you hold the other three close to constant, you cannot just flippantly attribute every difference in outcome to genes. Obviously, you can’t create complete equality in culture, facilities and training, but it still seems farfetched to make genetic inferences when comparing countries like the US to countries like Morocco on Olympic performance.

    Having spent years and years in multiple Asian countries, I can say with confidence that Americans are far more involved in sporting and leisure activities than people from those countries. There are large swathes of the world where no one thinks that hanging out in a swimming pool is a good way to spend an afternoon. On the other hand every Tom, Dick and Harry in the States seems to go into eruptions of joy when someone says the words “Pool party”.

    That’s why I think the best HBD arguments are made when people from a poor country do inordinately well at some sport, especially if the sport is not something that is overwhelmingly popular in their country. Even with that, the sample sizes are too small to draw good conclusions. For instance, India dominated field hockey in the first half of the 20th century. Pakistan dominated squash for several years. They both suck in both sports these days. What changed? Certainly not the genetics. Not nutrition and training, those have only gotten better. One can’t even attribute much to culture here, since these sports were never too popular in those countries to begin with. Sometimes things just happen randomly, read Nassim Taleb’s Fooled by Randomness.

    • Replies: @epebble
    In case of India and field hockey, the explanation seems to be the transition from natural turf to AstroTurf. Lacking the funds needed to go AstroTurf and also probably lack of desire to go from natural to man made turf, they lost their advantage.

    Technological changes can be dramatic. Detroit faded when gas prices went up forcing cars to go small - Japanese were good in miniaturizing mechanical stuff that American manufacturers were not. When cell phones went digital, Motorola, king of radios for half century faded away while Samsung became the new king. When Photography went digital, Kodak and Polaroid faded.
    , @meh
    For instance, India dominated field hockey in the first half of the 20th century. Pakistan dominated squash for several years. They both suck in both sports these days. What changed?

    For field hockey this has been mentioned several times recently in these comment threads due to the Olympics. The introduction of artificial turf radically changed the sport, and India and Pakistan could not afford to upgrade all of their training pitches to artificial turf; it is still a popular sport in India and Pakistan, but it is still played mostly on grass or dirt, and so most players never develop the skills required to play on artificial surfaces.

    As for squash, that is an elite sport and Pakistan dominated in an era when it was still limited to army officers and similar elite Public School types; once it became cheap enough in the post-war West to build a squash court at just about any local sports club, the available pool of talent in the West would have outstripped what Pakistan could produce; in spite of that Pakistan still were dominant in squash for a lot longer than one would have expected, late into the 20th century.

    One can’t even attribute much to culture here, since these sports were never too popular in those countries to begin with.

    Not true. Field hockey is still very popular in India and Pakistan, though cricket has certainly eclipsed it as the most popular sport since independence. You are closer to the truth with squash; it is certainly a popular elite sport in India and Pakistan, but not a sport for the commoners.

    Now as for blacks and swimming, they have plenty of access to public swimming pools and public school swim teams. There may be a "cultural" thing keeping them away from swimming, but then genes also influence culture so this isn't something that can be easily untangled. Blacks have almost no access to ice skating rinks but we've seen a few black ice skaters and black ice hockey players, more than one would expect, compared to swimmers. It would not surprise me if there were genetic factors at play here, but difficult to prove definitively.
    , @meh
    For instance, India dominated field hockey in the first half of the 20th century. Pakistan dominated squash for several years. They both suck in both sports these days. What changed?

    For field hockey this has been mentioned several times recently in these comment threads due to the Olympics. The introduction of artificial turf radically changed the sport, and India and Pakistan could not afford to upgrade all of their training pitches to artificial turf; it is still a popular sport in India and Pakistan, but it is still played mostly on grass or dirt, and so most players never develop the skills required to play on artificial surfaces.

    As for squash, that is an elite sport and Pakistan dominated in an era when it was still limited to army officers and similar elite Public School types; once it became cheap enough in the post-war West to build a squash court at just about any local sports club, the available pool of talent in the West would have outstripped what Pakistan could produce; in spite of that Pakistan still were dominant in squash for a lot longer than one would have expected, late into the 20th century.

    One can’t even attribute much to culture here, since these sports were never too popular in those countries to begin with.

    Not true. Field hockey is still very popular in India and Pakistan, though cricket has certainly eclipsed it as the most popular sport since independence. You are closer to the truth with squash; it is certainly a popular elite sport in India and Pakistan, but not a sport for the commoners.

    Now as for blacks and swimming, they have plenty of access to public swimming pools and public school swim teams. There may be a "cultural" thing keeping them away from swimming, but then genes also influence culture so this isn't something that can be easily untangled. Blacks have almost no access to ice skating rinks but we've seen a few black ice skaters and black ice hockey players, more than one would expect, compared to swimmers. It would not surprise me if there were genetic factors at play here, but difficult to prove definitively.
    , @meh
    For instance, India dominated field hockey in the first half of the 20th century. Pakistan dominated squash for several years. They both suck in both sports these days. What changed?

    For field hockey this has been mentioned several times recently in these comment threads due to the Olympics. The introduction of artificial turf radically changed the sport, and India and Pakistan could not afford to upgrade all of their training pitches to artificial turf; it is still a popular sport in India and Pakistan, but it is still played mostly on grass or dirt, and so most players never develop the skills required to play on artificial surfaces.

    As for squash, that is an elite sport and Pakistan dominated in an era when it was still limited to army officers and similar elite Public School types; once it became cheap enough in the post-war West to build a squash court at just about any local sports club, the available pool of talent in the West would have outstripped what Pakistan could produce; in spite of that Pakistan still were dominant in squash for a lot longer than one would have expected, late into the 20th century.

    One can’t even attribute much to culture here, since these sports were never too popular in those countries to begin with.

    Not true. Field hockey is still very popular in India and Pakistan, though cricket has certainly eclipsed it as the most popular sport since independence. You are closer to the truth with squash; it is certainly a popular elite sport in India and Pakistan, but not a sport for the commoners.

    Now as for blacks and swimming, they have plenty of access to public swimming pools and public school swim teams. There may be a "cultural" thing keeping them away from swimming, but then genes also influence culture so this isn't something that can be easily untangled. Blacks have almost no access to ice skating rinks but we've seen a few black ice skaters and black ice hockey players, more than one would expect, compared to swimmers. It would not surprise me if there were genetic factors at play here, but difficult to prove definitively.
  61. @thinkingabout it
    You have to admit, Steve, some of the stuff on HBD posted in these environs can be poorly thought out, outlandish, or plain stupid. A difference between groups does not automatically provide evidence for HBD. You, as a smart individual with good analytical skills, can see this. Many of your commenters can't. And your commenters come from a highly selected group with high mean IQ. One can only imagine what happens when 90 IQ dummies in Appalachia start getting into these ideas. Ideas like all Chinese people are merely grinds, and that white folk like themselves have the unique gift of "creativity", while ignoring the fact that up until about 300 years ago Chinese art and craft were considered the most exquisite in the world.

    Take the Olympics, for instance. While I find it quite likely that Blacks have some genetic advantages in running, there are a lot of other racial quirks in the Olympics' results whose mechanism aren't so clear cut. Are Whites really good at swimming because of fat distribution and arm span? Or is it just the fact that it's mostly middle-class or upper-class people who have good access to pools, and the training that's required to become a world-class swimmer?

    Before Tiger Woods, I'm sure some "hbd-aware" redneck would have thought that Blacks (half-blacks, to be precise) were terrible at golf because of poor impulse control, or too many fast twitch muscle fibers, or poor hand-eye coordination. Sounds plausible, but I think the far more likely explanation is that blacks simply don't play golf in anything approaching the numbers of Asians and Whites. Before that black chick won the gymnastics medal this year, I'm sure there were a bunch of people saying the same thing about heavy bone structure in blacks, and their unsuitability for the finesse of gymnastics. While ignoring the fact that most black chicks don't do gymnastics at the same rate as Whites do.

    HBD is real, but the tendencies of idiots to run with their biases is equally real. Once HBD becomes more popular, you can rest assured that popular discourse on it will become so detached from reality that it will make today's PC shibboleths seem like the apex of human rationality.

    Those who work on the HBD of sex differences, of course, are on more solid ground. This is Steven Pinker's main argument in The Blank Slate, where he eschews analyzing racial differences in favor of sex differences. Granted, there are a lot of people out there who try to biologise sex differences which are highly culturally generated, but the sexists have the fact that men have an entire Y chromosome worth of difference going for them.

    One can only imagine what happens when 90 IQ dummies in Appalachia start getting into these ideas.

    Don’t worry. You can tell 90 IQ dummies there’s no biodiversity relevant to golf because Tiger Woods. Case closed.

  62. I’m disappointed at the lack of mention of La Griffe du Lion. Physicists deserve their rightful recognition for being Problematic.

  63. @Harold

    A difference between groups does not automatically provide evidence for HBD. You, as a smart individual with good analytical skills, can see this. Many of your commenters can’t.
     
    Name one.

    Comments on blogs are a good place to try out hypotheses that might or might not be right.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    True. I submit the occasional borderline insane post and you generally quash them, for which I thank you profusely after a good night's sleep.
  64. @ben tillman

    It’s sort of unfair to class someone like hbdchick with figures like Sailer or Razib Khan. hbdchick is a nice person but not really erudite or sharp enough to be classed with them.
     
    Funny -- I feel the same way about Razib being mentioned with Steve.

    Well that’s because it’s personal with you. You were part of that MR crowd that had that feud with Razib and GNXP about a decade ago. I’m not a big Razib fan myself but he’s quite sharp and erudite.

    • Replies: @Immigrant from former USSR

    I’m not a big Razib fan myself but he’s quite sharp and erudite.
     
    I have the same opinion.
    , @ben tillman

    Well that’s because it’s personal with you.
     
    Not in the least. The problem is that his ability to do "science" stops when he encounters analysis that quantifies the fact that native populations are harmed by the presence of immigrants like Razib. When it's politically expedient, he actually denies that living things have an interest in staying alive! Here's one of his comments on Salter and EGI:

    http://www.gnxp.com/MT2/archives/003501.html
    , @Yojimbo/Zatoichi
    When it comes to scientific matters in a more general sense as well as the fields of modern biodiversity, genes, etc. Razib Khan is a true scholarly treasure and a welcomed voice.

    However, when it comes to other matters (e.g. history; philosphy; religion in general) it is unfortunate that his personal biases show and amply demonstrate that he lacks even the most basic competence to ever rise above a Monday Morning second guesser. As he is not a trained/post-doctorate historian, theologian, or philosopher, obviously his opinions are simply that--namely opinions and really shouldn't be taken seriously at all by clear thinking rational people when he expounds upon non-scientific matters.

    Of course, for such people as Mr. Khan, the fields of mathematics and scientific matters are of the highest order (with little to next to nothing coming close in relevance) he can rest in the knowledge that his areas of expertise are on the ascendancy in the twenty-first century.
    , @Buffalo Joe
    Anonymous, I get the Khans confused, the left has the constitution waving, Trumps hating Khan and he is good, Steve's Khan, Razib is bad. Posters here point out obvious difference that most intelligent and honest people would observe. My favorite liberal conservationist icon from the recent past is Jacques Cousteau who said the world would be a better place if 350,000 people die per day. He never really said which people, but I don't think he meant anyone in his circle of intellectual elitists.
  65. @Boethiuss
    "These days, they also point at you and scream racism, at which point WE laugh at THEM."

    Sometimes. But sometimes we also drive ourselves into intellectual and political cul-de-sacs for absolutely refusing to acknowledge the obvious.

    I wonder, if you were to talk to some random youth in Baltimore who has charges pending for possession with intent to distribute 2 ounces of cocaine, how much he really thinks racism is the real reason behind his fate. My guess is, not much. And unless there was a tactical reason for him to avoid it, he'd probably admit it.

    But here, us enlightened commentariat at iSteve, whose median g is at least one standard deviation above the typical American black male and maybe more, we talk ourselves into all sorts of bullshit simply because we refuse to accept any contrary evidence.

    Some liberal writes in the NYT that black high school juniors score low on the SAT because the test is racist, and the commenters here cite chapter and verse to refute it until the cows come home. At the same time, we believe that all the polls showing Donald Trump losing the Presidency to be fabrications of the MSM, which to my mind is even stupider.

    But here, us enlightened commentariat at iSteve, whose median g is at least one standard deviation above the typical American black male and maybe more….

    Maybe?

    Some liberal writes in the NYT that black high school juniors score low on the SAT because the test is racist, and the commenters here cite chapter and verse to refute it until the cows come home. At the same time, we believe that all the polls showing Donald Trump losing the Presidency to be fabrications of the MSM, which to my mind is even stupider.

    Which says a lot about the quality of your mind.

    We can observe Black intellectual deficiencies in all sorts of ways other than looking at SAT scores. Accordingly, we can reasonably conclude that a difference in test scores is not due to a “racist” test.

    Meanwhile, we also know that the MSM will fabricate anything, which means it’s entirely reasonable to suspect that the media and allied pollsters will fabricate polling data.

    • Replies: @Boethiuss
    "Meanwhile, we also know that the MSM will fabricate anything, which means it’s entirely reasonable to suspect that the media and allied pollsters will fabricate polling data."

    As it pertains to the current polling data (or mainstream polling data as an aggregate), this is just ignorant. Pollsters can make mistakes, they can also fall to groupthink, but in general at least they are not fabricating.
  66. “…when 90 IQ dummies in Appalachia start getting into these ideas.”

    Hey, that sounds like a racist statement written by a racist.

  67. @Anonymous
    Well that's because it's personal with you. You were part of that MR crowd that had that feud with Razib and GNXP about a decade ago. I'm not a big Razib fan myself but he's quite sharp and erudite.

    I’m not a big Razib fan myself but he’s quite sharp and erudite.

    I have the same opinion.

  68. @Broski

    "But here, us enlightened commentariat at iSteve, whose median g is at least one standard deviation above the typical American black male and maybe more . . ."

     

    So you think the average IQ around here is 100? Or you don't know much about IQs and SD? Either way, one gets the impression you're new to these hidden corners of the interwebs.

    “So you think the average IQ around here is 100? Or you don’t know much about IQs and SD? Either way, one gets the impression you’re new to these hidden corners of the interwebs.”

    At least, maybe more? Come on, I’m trying to avoid minutae here. In any event, the “smarter” we supposedly are, the less excuse we have.

  69. Writers like Feldman who laud the benefits of diversity, always fail to show convincingly why it’s such a good thing, other than nebulous reasons of little virtue. Many of us ask the question of diversity, Why? What purpose does it serve? Who benefits? Who loses? Does the good outweigh the bad? What is the greater good from having different peoples and cultures clash? Isn’t it possible that we’ve been through this before – in some past time, some past age – maybe, diversity clashes are why people are spread out to the four corners of the globe, inhabiting a set region for a particular people – Whites in Europe, Yellows in Asia, Blacks in Africa, etc.

    I certainly hope that the world doesn’t blend into a turd brown of mediocrity – why, heaven forbid – but this seems to be the ‘diversifiers’ end goal – the opposite of what preach – a world without diversity.

    • Replies: @rod1963
    People like Feldman and his supporters are usually the biggest racists in the woodpile. They socially and economically isolated themselves from the agendas the force down on white blue collars and middle-class types.

    Why do they isolate themselves? Because they know full well living in a all black or Hispanic neighborhood isn't healthy. The schools are shitty, the stores are run down and you don't go out of the house at night among other thing. Yet they have no problem subjecting lower class whites to this hell.

    Right now a**clowns like Feldy are going nuts because alternative views of race are percolating through the white middle-class and blue collars and it's freaking out these snot jobs. Feldy and his ilk wanted us to embrace cultural/racial vibrancy/diversity until it is too late for us to resist it.

    Of course most whites don't need a course in HBD to be aware some races are really full of defective and violent peoples and some are not.

    "Who benefits" The upper classes that are protected from these schemes. Not to mention businesses and governments love it because it means more money, more people being hired, more taxes, etc.

    Take Twin Falls Idaho. The city has made it a policy to bring in as many Somalis and Syrian muzzies as possible. Why? Because the local businesses are hiring them instead of Americans and since they get lots of government aid, they're busy spending taxpayer in stores like crazy. So who cares if their kids rape 5 year olds and disabled women. Heck the police force is already 10% Muslim(Bosnians).

    , @dfordoom

    I certainly hope that the world doesn’t blend into a turd brown of mediocrity – why, heaven forbid – but this seems to be the ‘diversifiers’ end goal – the opposite of what preach – a world without diversity.
     
    That's the supreme irony. The goal of diversity is to destroy diversity. Diversity is the most racist ideology ever promulgated.

    But at least it's fair. Every single culture will end up getting trashed.
  70. “The altright was attractive to me primarily because it had less groupthink and bias than the mainstream, but as our popularity grows that no longer seems to be the case.”

    Yeah that’s part of it but I think a bigger issue is relating to the mainstream. We know the mainstream has a warped view of the altright, but to some extent it goes the other direction as well.

    Altrighters (at least the ones here) delude themselves into thinking that because they have a knowledge edge relative to the mainstream pertaining to something, they have a knowledge edge over everything, and therefore can safely ignore anything inconvenient.

    • Replies: @Je Suis Omar Mateen
    "Altrighters (at least the ones here) delude themselves into thinking that because they have a knowledge edge relative to the mainstream pertaining to something, they have a knowledge edge over everything, and therefore can safely ignore anything inconvenient."

    Your generalizations are boring and without evidence. I smell projection.
    , @Mr. Anon
    "Altrighters (at least the ones here) delude themselves into thinking that because they have a knowledge edge relative to the mainstream pertaining to something, they have a knowledge edge over everything, and therefore can safely ignore anything inconvenient."

    Or they are smarter than average and think they have a knowledge edge over other things because.............they do.
  71. @ben tillman

    But here, us enlightened commentariat at iSteve, whose median g is at least one standard deviation above the typical American black male and maybe more....
     
    Maybe?


    Some liberal writes in the NYT that black high school juniors score low on the SAT because the test is racist, and the commenters here cite chapter and verse to refute it until the cows come home. At the same time, we believe that all the polls showing Donald Trump losing the Presidency to be fabrications of the MSM, which to my mind is even stupider.
     
    Which says a lot about the quality of your mind.

    We can observe Black intellectual deficiencies in all sorts of ways other than looking at SAT scores. Accordingly, we can reasonably conclude that a difference in test scores is not due to a "racist" test.

    Meanwhile, we also know that the MSM will fabricate anything, which means it's entirely reasonable to suspect that the media and allied pollsters will fabricate polling data.

    “Meanwhile, we also know that the MSM will fabricate anything, which means it’s entirely reasonable to suspect that the media and allied pollsters will fabricate polling data.”

    As it pertains to the current polling data (or mainstream polling data as an aggregate), this is just ignorant. Pollsters can make mistakes, they can also fall to groupthink, but in general at least they are not fabricating.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    There are many ways a poll can be wrong short of outright fabrication. You can (either intentionally or unintentionally) sample a group that does not really consist of likely voters or which contains more Democrats than the general population. You can ask questions that are biased - the way you phrase a question changes the results. You can live in a society where people are afraid/embarrassed to tell you who they are really voting for. Etc.
    , @Difference Maker
    Actually, it is this that is remarkably ignorant.

    The media and the establishment are all against Trump because he has made himself their enemy, not just because he has hurt their and your cuck feelings.

    Never underestimate the deviousness of the rulers. The powerful are not at heart meek weaklings
  72. @anon
    How does HBD explain the wide range of IQ within an ethnic group?

    It doesn't need to. That's natural variance that nobody of any ideological background denies.

    Once there is such a wide gap will not the smart ones break off into their own group


    Given enough time, sure. That's what Charles Murray's "Coming Apart" was about.

    be the ones who survive a famine?

    It would help you survive a famine, sure. But, then, ruthlessness and willingness to engage in physical violence to take what you need would too.

    Ideally, given enough intelligence, it would prevent most famines from happening in the first place, so you might never find out.

    It doesn’t need to. That’s natural variance that nobody of any ideological background denies.

    just seems that in a hunter gather society people are going to mate within the group without much regard to intelligence. Strength, courage, deviousness, manual dexterity, disease resistance, being sexy, all sorts of traits will be decisive in who mates with who. And yet hunter gather groups like Africans do show wide ranges of IQ. Just as wide a range as Whites and Asians.

    • Replies: @anon
    just seems that in a hunter gather society people are going to mate within the group without much regard to intelligence.

    Yeah. Exactly.

    And yet hunter gather groups like Africans do show wide ranges of IQ.

    I'm not sure that that's actually true, but if it is, that's exactly the point. If intelligence has no effect on your ability to pass on your genes, then you're going to get a range that's all over the place.

    Let's say there was a gene for "being really good at card games".

    If women didn't care about card games, then men with the gene and without the gene would be equally likely to pass it on. So you'd have a whole wide range of people on that area.

    If, for some reason, women suddenly did start caring about card games, then you'd start to see people with the gene for being good at card games passing their genes on more.

    Intelligence is sort of like that. If you were a hunter-gatherer, in an environment where there was plenty to hunt and gather, intelligence wouldn't really be relevant.

    But if you were living in an environment where intelligence made you more successful, you'd start to see selection for intelligence.

    This is the basis for the book The 10,000 Year Explosion. You should read it.

  73. @thinkingabout it
    Having access to pools or scholarships is not the only issue. If access were all that mattered, given the extensive affirmative action program in the US, every black would be a theoretical physicist. It's more about culture and what people actually do in real life. You can't make judgements about blacks' genetic swimming ability based on Olympic results, if they don't go for swimming in any large numbers or with any passion. So any HBD deductions you make are invalid, plain bad science.

    Genes, culture, access to facilities, and intensive training - they are all equally important. And unless you hold the other three close to constant, you cannot just flippantly attribute every difference in outcome to genes. Obviously, you can't create complete equality in culture, facilities and training, but it still seems farfetched to make genetic inferences when comparing countries like the US to countries like Morocco on Olympic performance.

    Having spent years and years in multiple Asian countries, I can say with confidence that Americans are far more involved in sporting and leisure activities than people from those countries. There are large swathes of the world where no one thinks that hanging out in a swimming pool is a good way to spend an afternoon. On the other hand every Tom, Dick and Harry in the States seems to go into eruptions of joy when someone says the words "Pool party".

    That's why I think the best HBD arguments are made when people from a poor country do inordinately well at some sport, especially if the sport is not something that is overwhelmingly popular in their country. Even with that, the sample sizes are too small to draw good conclusions. For instance, India dominated field hockey in the first half of the 20th century. Pakistan dominated squash for several years. They both suck in both sports these days. What changed? Certainly not the genetics. Not nutrition and training, those have only gotten better. One can't even attribute much to culture here, since these sports were never too popular in those countries to begin with. Sometimes things just happen randomly, read Nassim Taleb's Fooled by Randomness.

    In case of India and field hockey, the explanation seems to be the transition from natural turf to AstroTurf. Lacking the funds needed to go AstroTurf and also probably lack of desire to go from natural to man made turf, they lost their advantage.

    Technological changes can be dramatic. Detroit faded when gas prices went up forcing cars to go small – Japanese were good in miniaturizing mechanical stuff that American manufacturers were not. When cell phones went digital, Motorola, king of radios for half century faded away while Samsung became the new king. When Photography went digital, Kodak and Polaroid faded.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    Other stuff happens too - societies age or change or lose their focus, there are internal cultural factors, etc. Japan was the king of miniature portable electronics from the moment the transistor radio was invented and yet the cell phone race was won by Korean Samsung and LG (and the "Walkman" of the 2000s was an American Apple iPod)and not Japanese Sony and Panasonic. No way that would have happened 30 years ago. Sometimes countries just lose their mojo in a particular field. You have to fight the battle fresh every day and sometimes you run out of steam and there is a young hungry upstart at your heels the moment you slow down. Now the Chinese are going after the Koreans in cell phones.
  74. Far from Steve’s rote, ironic-Holocaust memery in that direction, this article is great for “HBD Chick.” This article is great for Steve– I’d wager it made his 2016; who’d need something as trite as an election, when your “rivals” in “The Media” are blurbing you again? You can tell that the writer of the piece is mad, but not exactly why. He greatly overrates the scoff factor that is here expected to go with “discussion of races.” There are enough Forward readers who discuss literally nothing else– a psychological dodge, as Sigmund Sailer would diagnose it — that the column only tips them off to another racial kibbitzer instead of scaring away the subscribers. This article is the equivalent of MTV announcing, “Don’t watch our new primetime soap opera series because you’d be offended by all the teen sex it portrays!”

    • Replies: @Jack D
    As Trump knows, just getting the MSM to acknowledge you exist is a victory. The fact that Feldman feels compelled to mention Steve's name in order to refute him instead of just totally ignoring him means that Steve is now too big and important to ignore (don't let it go to your head).

    Of course the "refutation" consists mostly of pointing and sputtering and putting scare quotes around "race" and various other non-sequiturs, but hey, it's a start.
  75. @anon
    When you have intimate knowledge of a subject, it becomes glaringly obvious to you how much the media get it wrong when they report on it. Mostly it's out of incompetence or laziness and not malice.

    In this case of this forward writer, he appears to be incompetent.

    No, I don’t think he’s incompetent. There’s enough skill displayed in the rhetoric to mark it down as malice. He repeatedly runs the same scams Stephen Jay Gould did, and the article reads like “Mismeasure of Man” in essay form.

    He repeatedly ties modern views of HBD to pre-scientific forms, such as phrenology. He conflates the recognition of racial differences with the need for public policy issues, in effect saying that if race differences are real then it must follow that Blacks must be segregated or denied the vote. It’s a dressed up argumentum ad consequentiam.

    He lumps into the movement some camps that have little to do with HBD, such as that Khazar hypothesis people. The original Khazar hypothesis by Schomo Sand was not based on genetic analysis; Sand is a historian, not a geneticist, and is in fact critical of genetic studies, period.

    In 2010, when Harry Ostrer, a professor of genetics at the Albert Einstein College of Medicine, announced the results of a DNA study showing “powerful genetic markers of Jewish ancestry,” Sand told Science Magazine that “Hitler would certainly have been very pleased.”

    A geneticist, Eran Elhaik, argued for the Khazar hypothesis but as I recall he’s very much in the minority. Are people who use genetics to argue for the Khazar thesis in the HBD camp, but those who use genetics to argue against it outside?

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    I don't know if I've ever written about the Khazar hypothesis. (I don't even know how to spell Kzahar ...) I'm vaguely interested in it because it was promoted by Arthur Koestler, who was a glamorous figure when I was young. But the genomic studies in the 21st Century have found very little evidence to support it.

    If there is an HBD crowd angle on Jewish ancestral genetics, it's in calling attention to the sizable Italian contribution to Ashkenazi ancestry. I wrote in 2013: "Genetic research on the ancestry of Jewish populations tends to get politicized because of the sneaking suspicion that the average Palestinian may be more closely related to the Hebrews of 70 AD than is, say, Bibi Netanyahu."

    I put up pictures of Netanyahu with Arafat and Netanyahu with Berlusconi:

    http://isteve.blogspot.com/2013/10/nicholas-wade-on-ashkenazi-ancestry.html

    I'd say that Netanyahu looks more like Berlusconi than he looks like Arafat.

    For comparison, here's Netanyahu with his old pal Mitt Romney, who is pretty heavily English:

    http://images.csmonitor.com/csm/2012/09/ROMNEY_FOREIGN_POLICY_23067687.jpg?alias=standard_600x400
  76. It is a word so slippery as to be meaningless

    That same man considers non-binary gender neutral Hebrew “super cool”. Adjust language to ideology.

  77. “Yet on HBD blogs across the web, the data analyses of world-class geneticists are held up as evidence that races exist, and that these differences are, to varying degrees, worthy of social and legal regulation” so he accuses HBD to want to introduce social and legal regulation instead of simply acknowledging racial differences and then
    “However, at least in the blogs and forums I examined, there was little discussion of what to do with the data of “human biodiversity.””
    accuses HBD to simply acknowledge racial differences instead of doing something with it, like introducing social and legal regulations

  78. @Hubbub
    Writers like Feldman who laud the benefits of diversity, always fail to show convincingly why it's such a good thing, other than nebulous reasons of little virtue. Many of us ask the question of diversity, Why? What purpose does it serve? Who benefits? Who loses? Does the good outweigh the bad? What is the greater good from having different peoples and cultures clash? Isn't it possible that we've been through this before - in some past time, some past age - maybe, diversity clashes are why people are spread out to the four corners of the globe, inhabiting a set region for a particular people - Whites in Europe, Yellows in Asia, Blacks in Africa, etc.

    I certainly hope that the world doesn't blend into a turd brown of mediocrity - why, heaven forbid - but this seems to be the 'diversifiers' end goal - the opposite of what preach - a world without diversity.

    People like Feldman and his supporters are usually the biggest racists in the woodpile. They socially and economically isolated themselves from the agendas the force down on white blue collars and middle-class types.

    Why do they isolate themselves? Because they know full well living in a all black or Hispanic neighborhood isn’t healthy. The schools are shitty, the stores are run down and you don’t go out of the house at night among other thing. Yet they have no problem subjecting lower class whites to this hell.

    Right now a**clowns like Feldy are going nuts because alternative views of race are percolating through the white middle-class and blue collars and it’s freaking out these snot jobs. Feldy and his ilk wanted us to embrace cultural/racial vibrancy/diversity until it is too late for us to resist it.

    Of course most whites don’t need a course in HBD to be aware some races are really full of defective and violent peoples and some are not.

    “Who benefits” The upper classes that are protected from these schemes. Not to mention businesses and governments love it because it means more money, more people being hired, more taxes, etc.

    Take Twin Falls Idaho. The city has made it a policy to bring in as many Somalis and Syrian muzzies as possible. Why? Because the local businesses are hiring them instead of Americans and since they get lots of government aid, they’re busy spending taxpayer in stores like crazy. So who cares if their kids rape 5 year olds and disabled women. Heck the police force is already 10% Muslim(Bosnians).

  79. @Steve Richter
    How does HBD explain the wide range of IQ within an ethnic group? Same question with physical attributes. Once there is such a wide gap will not the smart ones break off into their own group or be the ones who survive a famine?

    Would you say that the difference in height between men and women cannot be genetic? After all, there is such a wide (and overlapping) range.

    • Replies: @Steve Richter

    Would you say that the difference in height between men and women cannot be genetic? After all, there is such a wide (and overlapping) range.
     
    Selecting for intelligence seems different that for other traits. Humans are the only animals that have increased their intelligence over evolutionary time. ( assuming that current day humans are smarter than the ones who migrated from Africa. ) Just thinking that before we accept that HBD has produced an increase in intelligence there has to be an explanation for why no other species has evolved greater intelligence
  80. @thinkingabout it
    Very true. I keep seeing commenters come up with outrageous statements like "Donald trump is going to get the largest share of the black vote of any Republican candidate in the last 50 years!".
    And then we have multiple actual polls showing blacks backing Hillary like 99 to 1. The altright was attractive to me primarily because it had less groupthink and bias than the mainstream, but as our popularity grows that no longer seems to be the case.

    Blacks have never voted 99% any particular way because if nothing else they tend to make mistakes and pull the wrong lever. Seventy to ninety percent margins are typical with blacks: much higher than 95 indicates vote fraud since at least five percent will either screw up or get a wild hair at the last minute.

    Trump probably will get a few percent higher percentage of the black vote than would be otherwise expected because of his pimpin’ lifestyle and perceived great wealth. It would have to be a very, very tight race for that to matter.

    It would be interesting to turn the question around and ask: what’s the least lopsided the black results have ever been in a state or congressional election, and why. Has there ever been a fifty-fifty black vote? And what were its circumstances?

    • Agree: Travis
    • Replies: @Travis
    The only President to obtain over 89% of the Black vote was Obama.
    Bill Clinton only received 83% of the Black vote in 1992.
    John Kerry obtained 89% of the Black vote in 2004
  81. We need a new political ideology that accepts HBD and makes kind and prudent decisions with genetics in mind.

    Personally I’m moving towards favouring a sort of global re-engineering using CRISPR so as to produce a clean break from all existing ethnic identities. Look at chickens. No-one really cares about the differences between various subspecies of wild junglefowl now that we have the domestic chicken. That should be the goal for humanity. A new, genetically heterogeneous & incredibly smart population more concerned with P versus NP than I versus P.

    • Replies: @Chrisnonymous
    You mean farmers and consumers don't care about wild junglefowl. The domestic chicken has been reduced an abused piece of organic production line machinery. People will never calculate or reason as well as AI. The only future for humanity is as a self-interested, contextualized, irrational animal.
    , @Jack D
    The only problem is that you've got to break a whole lot of eggs to make that omelet. For one thing, if you were going to create this new future superhuman race (you-know-who gave racial breeding experiments a bad name anyway) it would probably not include a lot of African genes or brown genes in general. You would end up with some kind of white-Ashkenazi-E. Asian hapa hybrid (much like the new class of America's elite - Trump's grandchildren and Hillary's, etc.) and what would happen to the other several billion people whose genes were substandard? The group that you describe will in fact be our future overlords (and I for one welcome them!) but they are not going to be the bulk of humanity.

    For much of history and in many places, the ruling class and the masses were genetically distinct - the Manchus ruled China, Russian royalty was more British and German than Russian, a few hundred white planters ruled over the black slave masses of the Caribbean, etc. I think that is where we are headed again. Because of the necessities of maintaining a democratic front, you have to toss the masses enough of a bone to keep yourself in power, but in the end the elites get most of the goodies.
  82. @Steve Sailer
    Perhaps Razib and HBD Chick feel that way about me!

    Gosh darn it, Steve. You’re a heckuva guy!

  83. @thinkingabout it
    You have to admit, Steve, some of the stuff on HBD posted in these environs can be poorly thought out, outlandish, or plain stupid. A difference between groups does not automatically provide evidence for HBD. You, as a smart individual with good analytical skills, can see this. Many of your commenters can't. And your commenters come from a highly selected group with high mean IQ. One can only imagine what happens when 90 IQ dummies in Appalachia start getting into these ideas. Ideas like all Chinese people are merely grinds, and that white folk like themselves have the unique gift of "creativity", while ignoring the fact that up until about 300 years ago Chinese art and craft were considered the most exquisite in the world.

    Take the Olympics, for instance. While I find it quite likely that Blacks have some genetic advantages in running, there are a lot of other racial quirks in the Olympics' results whose mechanism aren't so clear cut. Are Whites really good at swimming because of fat distribution and arm span? Or is it just the fact that it's mostly middle-class or upper-class people who have good access to pools, and the training that's required to become a world-class swimmer?

    Before Tiger Woods, I'm sure some "hbd-aware" redneck would have thought that Blacks (half-blacks, to be precise) were terrible at golf because of poor impulse control, or too many fast twitch muscle fibers, or poor hand-eye coordination. Sounds plausible, but I think the far more likely explanation is that blacks simply don't play golf in anything approaching the numbers of Asians and Whites. Before that black chick won the gymnastics medal this year, I'm sure there were a bunch of people saying the same thing about heavy bone structure in blacks, and their unsuitability for the finesse of gymnastics. While ignoring the fact that most black chicks don't do gymnastics at the same rate as Whites do.

    HBD is real, but the tendencies of idiots to run with their biases is equally real. Once HBD becomes more popular, you can rest assured that popular discourse on it will become so detached from reality that it will make today's PC shibboleths seem like the apex of human rationality.

    Those who work on the HBD of sex differences, of course, are on more solid ground. This is Steven Pinker's main argument in The Blank Slate, where he eschews analyzing racial differences in favor of sex differences. Granted, there are a lot of people out there who try to biologise sex differences which are highly culturally generated, but the sexists have the fact that men have an entire Y chromosome worth of difference going for them.

    Actually race differences often trump sex differences – especially in the education field. For example, East Asians females, on average, outperform white males in math and slaughter black males. White females, pay off their student loans faster than NAM males and have lower unemployment rates. And both white men and women have a far wider range of non-work related hobbies and interests than people of other races. How many pet shows and sci fi conventions do blacks and Asians put on?

    If anything, the HBD crowd are more prone to exaggerate sex differences and underestimate race differences.

  84. “the inbreeding patterns of Ashkenazi Jews”

    That’s of interest to geneticists and physicians (e.g. Tay-Sachs), but the heffalump in the room which he ignores (in public*) is Ashkenazi IQ, which gets mentioned here far more than inbreeding, because it’s so much more important to most people than a few rare-ish syndromes – after all, stratification by wealth/social status pretty well maps to IQ.

    * I’m sure there are goyische kopf jokes in private – and sometimes in public

    http://lyingeyes.blogspot.com/2005/12/more-on-pinker-goyishe-kopf.html

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    The Korean War was a series of mistakes made by the men -- Stalin, MacArthur, Mao -- who had emerged from the 1940s as huge winners. It's depressing and alarming to read up on the Korean War.
  85. @Anonymous Nephew
    "the inbreeding patterns of Ashkenazi Jews"

    That's of interest to geneticists and physicians (e.g. Tay-Sachs), but the heffalump in the room which he ignores (in public*) is Ashkenazi IQ, which gets mentioned here far more than inbreeding, because it's so much more important to most people than a few rare-ish syndromes - after all, stratification by wealth/social status pretty well maps to IQ.

    * I'm sure there are goyische kopf jokes in private - and sometimes in public

    http://lyingeyes.blogspot.com/2005/12/more-on-pinker-goyishe-kopf.html

    The Korean War was a series of mistakes made by the men — Stalin, MacArthur, Mao — who had emerged from the 1940s as huge winners. It’s depressing and alarming to read up on the Korean War.

    • Replies: @Anonym
    The Korean War was a series of mistakes made by the men — Stalin, MacArthur, Mao — who had emerged from the 1940s as huge winners. It’s depressing and alarming to read up on the Korean War.


    My guess is your reply was accidentally to my comment here.

    http://www.unz.com/isteve/seth-rich-was-he-murdered-by-the-democrats-elite-or-by-the-democrats-base/#comment-1527370
    , @SPMoore8
    I have to wonder what the Korean War has to do with this, since my father went back in August 1950 to keep his 1945 rank, and then spent close to a year there, from Inchon to Chosin and back to Seoul. My impression is that all sides went as far as they could go, as long as it was easy, then when they met resistance (Pusan, Chosin) they had trouble backing down. But I'd be interested in hearing more about this.
    , @Buddwing
    Steve, I noticed this seemingly stray comment, and feel that it reflects a general view that I had always assumed to be correct, but now think is probably wrong. In Chang and Halliday's Mao: The Unknown Story, the authors make a strong case that the idea that the Korean War was all a mistake simply ignores Stalin's and, particularly, Mao's objectives. Far from starting and escalating due to US mistakes, the war was intended by Stalin to tie up the US far from Europe, so as to protect Stalin's control in eastern Europe. Mao provided the cannon fodder in return for a Soviet-constructed arms industry. The war destroyed the PLA as an alternative power to Mao and the CP. The war ended because Stalin died and no more Soviet assistance to China was forthcoming.

    The standard interpretation produces analysis like this (from the History.com website):

    In late June 1950, it became apparent that the Soviet action had backfired when the issue of North Korea’s invasion of South Korea was brought before the Security Council. By June 27, the Security Council voted to invoke military action by the United Nations for the first time in the organization’s history. The Soviets could have blocked the action in the Security Council, since the United States, Soviet Union, China, Britain, and France each had absolute veto power, but no Russian delegate was present. In just a short time, a multinational U.N. force arrived in South Korea and the grueling three-year Korean War was underway.
     
    In retrospect do you want to bet that the Soviet UN representative, Ambassador Brerabitov, I believe, actually let the Truman administration slip something past them?
  86. @Kylie
    Uh oh, Steve!

    If Ari is mentioning you by name, it won't be long before Heidi Beirich has you in her sights. She must be lonely now that Lawrence Auster is dead. I expect you'll be getting one of her disconcertingly frisky emails inviting you to chat with her.

    I hope you'll resist the gentlemanly impulse to keep her correspondence to yourself. It's an election year and I can use all the laughs I can get.

    I hope this old piece by blogger Hipster Racist about lonely Heidi will give you a laugh:

    https://eradica.wordpress.com/2013/06/03/50-pounds-of-heidi/

    • Replies: @Kylie
    Love it! Thanks a million.
  87. @Broski
    You believe correctly. He's a Jewish fellow named Saletan, who learned a lesson in the politics of the whole thing.

    Yes, and the public carpet crawl and foot-kissing he suffered was very instructive to the other citizens of Proggnation. As I recall , it went on for some time.

  88. He briefly had a job at The New York Times as a writer for its Opinion section, before Gawker reported that he’d contributed to the virulently racist Taki’s Magazine and written to VDARE.com, an anti-immigrant website.

    Always amusing to see how unselfaware these supposed liberals are, when they so casually approve of what, in other contexts, they would recognise (and condemn utterly and without reservation) as blacklisting, McCarthyism, guilt by association, totalitarian suppression of dissent, etc.

    JS Mill made a valid point when he pointed out that the very at of suppressing dissent calls into question the validity of the mainstream opinions that are thereby protected from criticism:

    First, if any opinion is compelled to silence, that opinion may, for aught we can certainly know, be true. To deny this is to assume our own infallibility. Secondly, though the silenced opinion be an error, it may, and very commonly does, contain a portion of truth; and since the general or prevailing opinion on any subject is rarely or never the whole truth, it is only by the collision of adverse opinions that the remainder of the truth has any chance of being supplied. Thirdly, even if the received opinion be not only true, but the whole truth; unless it is suffered to be, and actually is, vigorously and earnestly contested, it will, by most of those who receive it, be held in the manner of a prejudice, with little comprehension or feeling of its rational grounds. And not only this, but, fourthly, the meaning of the doctrine itself will be in danger of being lost, or enfeebled, and deprived of its vital effect on the character and conduct: the dogma becoming a mere formal profession, inefficacious for good, but cumbering the ground, and preventing the growth of any real and heartfelt conviction, from reason or personal experience.

    This Feldman should be locked in a room with a copy of On Liberty until he can produce a plausible refutation of Mill’s arguments.

  89. @Boomstick
    No, I don't think he's incompetent. There's enough skill displayed in the rhetoric to mark it down as malice. He repeatedly runs the same scams Stephen Jay Gould did, and the article reads like "Mismeasure of Man" in essay form.

    He repeatedly ties modern views of HBD to pre-scientific forms, such as phrenology. He conflates the recognition of racial differences with the need for public policy issues, in effect saying that if race differences are real then it must follow that Blacks must be segregated or denied the vote. It's a dressed up argumentum ad consequentiam.

    He lumps into the movement some camps that have little to do with HBD, such as that Khazar hypothesis people. The original Khazar hypothesis by Schomo Sand was not based on genetic analysis; Sand is a historian, not a geneticist, and is in fact critical of genetic studies, period.

    In 2010, when Harry Ostrer, a professor of genetics at the Albert Einstein College of Medicine, announced the results of a DNA study showing "powerful genetic markers of Jewish ancestry," Sand told Science Magazine that "Hitler would certainly have been very pleased."
     
    A geneticist, Eran Elhaik, argued for the Khazar hypothesis but as I recall he's very much in the minority. Are people who use genetics to argue for the Khazar thesis in the HBD camp, but those who use genetics to argue against it outside?

    I don’t know if I’ve ever written about the Khazar hypothesis. (I don’t even know how to spell Kzahar …) I’m vaguely interested in it because it was promoted by Arthur Koestler, who was a glamorous figure when I was young. But the genomic studies in the 21st Century have found very little evidence to support it.

    If there is an HBD crowd angle on Jewish ancestral genetics, it’s in calling attention to the sizable Italian contribution to Ashkenazi ancestry. I wrote in 2013: “Genetic research on the ancestry of Jewish populations tends to get politicized because of the sneaking suspicion that the average Palestinian may be more closely related to the Hebrews of 70 AD than is, say, Bibi Netanyahu.”

    I put up pictures of Netanyahu with Arafat and Netanyahu with Berlusconi:

    http://isteve.blogspot.com/2013/10/nicholas-wade-on-ashkenazi-ancestry.html

    I’d say that Netanyahu looks more like Berlusconi than he looks like Arafat.

    For comparison, here’s Netanyahu with his old pal Mitt Romney, who is pretty heavily English:

    http://images.csmonitor.com/csm/2012/09/ROMNEY_FOREIGN_POLICY_23067687.jpg?alias=standard_600x400

    • Replies: @Anonymous Nephew
    Berlusconi ! I'd been wondering who the British businessman Dan Wagner reminded me of


    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dan_Wagner#/media/File:Dan_Wagner_-_UK_Tech_Entrepreneur.jpg

    http://thefederalist.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/8366737971_248457e4e2_b.jpg

    , @Jack D
    The Khazar thing was just slander to make HBDer's sound tin foil hattish and nutsy. It was like assuming (before Trump killed that meme) that all Republicans were holy rolling Christian fundamentalists. You have to look at these things from inside the coastal urban sophisticate bubble - he is looking for things that will enable him to dismiss you (and enable his friends and readers to dismiss you) as an unserious person and not an intellectual equal whose arguments need to be taken seriously. Meanwhile, someone like Sabrina Rubin Erdely is automatically entitled to the benefit of the doubt even if she writes about rapes on broken glass tables in the dark, because she is one of them.
    , @SPMoore8
    Arthur Koestler was a Hungarian Jew and in my experience Hungarians of Jewish background assimilate and/or become secular at a fairly high rate. In fact, the most nationalist Hungarians I have known were of Jewish background. This may have to do with the fact that Hungarian nationality seems to me to be more language based than ethnic or religion based.

    The original Khazar thesis was based on an idea promoted I think by another assimilated Hungarian Jew in the late 19th C. The idea was that Jews were just another Central Asian tribe, like most of the other peoples who live in Hungary (Hungary is a large ethnic mix, it's the language that holds it together: some Hungarian here can correct me). In a way, this argues that Jews are just Europeans like everyone else, forget about the Deicide bit or the King David bit or the Holy Land. I think it is wrong, in an absolute sense, but it is probably true in at least a partial sense, because there were several groups in Russia (as we have discussed) who practiced something similar to Judaism and some of those people married into East European Jewish communities (I think Ariel Sharon is the one everyone mentions.)

    Koestler got hold of the idea in the 1970's because he wanted to argue against the Jewish obsession with Zionism. (Koestler also was active in Zionism in the 1930's, in addition to being active in communism). That was the point of his book. When people talk about Khazars nowadays however they are doing it primarily to argue that Zionism is fraudulent, which is not what Koestler was trying to say. The later fellow, Shlomo Sand (an Israeli), has recently (last 15 years) argued something similar.

    So basically the big argument is whether "Jews" are "Europeans" or "Middle Easterners" (we are setting aside the numerous Jewish people of non-white (e.g., Ethiopian) ancestry). HBD actually supports the MENA origins, at least to about 50%, the other 50% being usually earmarked as "Italian" which makes a lot of sense to the casual observations of everyone and including in Frank Zappa's "Dancing Fool".

    I think there's a problem with promoting genetics ("I can trace my ancestry back to the pyramids") versus the fairly obvious European nature of every Ashkenazi and Sephardic Jew I have ever met (and including Algerian Jews).
    , @Bee
    Palestinian Muslims and other Arabs in the region are heavily descended from the Muslim Arabs who came to the Levant in the 600s and onwards. So I don't see why Netanyahu needs to look like Arafat (not that resemblance of this sort proves anything).

    Why does no one care how genetically close modern Irish or English (no, not recent immigrants) are to the people who lived in those countries 2000 years ago?

    Just about no ethnic group is the same genetically as it was 2000 years ago. But Jews are closer than most.
  90. Here’s a post by Razib in 2012:

    “Ashkenazi Jews are probably not descended from the Khazars”

    http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2012/08/ashkenazi-jews-are-probably-not-descended-from-the-khazars/#.V67oeZMoSEI

  91. On the other hand, Arafat looks a lot like Ringo Starr, whose ancestry is apparently very conventional for a Liverpudlian:

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/1435135/Family-detective-Ringo-Starr.html

    • Replies: @Bee
    People really need to stop using this word, "apparently", about totally factually accurate information that doesn't agree with their own pre-conceptions.

    BTW, according to this genetic study, "a pre-Islamic expansion Levant was more genetically similar to Europeans than to Middle Easterners", which fits in with the idea that Mr. Arafat was probably heavily descended from people who came to the Levant in the 600s and onwards.

    http://journals.plos.org/plosgenetics/article?id=10.1371/journal.pgen.1003316
  92. @thinkingabout it
    You have to admit, Steve, some of the stuff on HBD posted in these environs can be poorly thought out, outlandish, or plain stupid. A difference between groups does not automatically provide evidence for HBD. You, as a smart individual with good analytical skills, can see this. Many of your commenters can't. And your commenters come from a highly selected group with high mean IQ. One can only imagine what happens when 90 IQ dummies in Appalachia start getting into these ideas. Ideas like all Chinese people are merely grinds, and that white folk like themselves have the unique gift of "creativity", while ignoring the fact that up until about 300 years ago Chinese art and craft were considered the most exquisite in the world.

    Take the Olympics, for instance. While I find it quite likely that Blacks have some genetic advantages in running, there are a lot of other racial quirks in the Olympics' results whose mechanism aren't so clear cut. Are Whites really good at swimming because of fat distribution and arm span? Or is it just the fact that it's mostly middle-class or upper-class people who have good access to pools, and the training that's required to become a world-class swimmer?

    Before Tiger Woods, I'm sure some "hbd-aware" redneck would have thought that Blacks (half-blacks, to be precise) were terrible at golf because of poor impulse control, or too many fast twitch muscle fibers, or poor hand-eye coordination. Sounds plausible, but I think the far more likely explanation is that blacks simply don't play golf in anything approaching the numbers of Asians and Whites. Before that black chick won the gymnastics medal this year, I'm sure there were a bunch of people saying the same thing about heavy bone structure in blacks, and their unsuitability for the finesse of gymnastics. While ignoring the fact that most black chicks don't do gymnastics at the same rate as Whites do.

    HBD is real, but the tendencies of idiots to run with their biases is equally real. Once HBD becomes more popular, you can rest assured that popular discourse on it will become so detached from reality that it will make today's PC shibboleths seem like the apex of human rationality.

    Those who work on the HBD of sex differences, of course, are on more solid ground. This is Steven Pinker's main argument in The Blank Slate, where he eschews analyzing racial differences in favor of sex differences. Granted, there are a lot of people out there who try to biologise sex differences which are highly culturally generated, but the sexists have the fact that men have an entire Y chromosome worth of difference going for them.

    You left out the most obvious one (gee I wonder why), that blacks always win the 100 sprints, no doubt you are going to say that its because of culture or poverty or some other stupid excuse like that, but then you are going to have to explain why dirt poor India is not producing these oppressed sprinters like the West African descended ones.

  93. @thinkingabout it
    Having access to pools or scholarships is not the only issue. If access were all that mattered, given the extensive affirmative action program in the US, every black would be a theoretical physicist. It's more about culture and what people actually do in real life. You can't make judgements about blacks' genetic swimming ability based on Olympic results, if they don't go for swimming in any large numbers or with any passion. So any HBD deductions you make are invalid, plain bad science.

    Genes, culture, access to facilities, and intensive training - they are all equally important. And unless you hold the other three close to constant, you cannot just flippantly attribute every difference in outcome to genes. Obviously, you can't create complete equality in culture, facilities and training, but it still seems farfetched to make genetic inferences when comparing countries like the US to countries like Morocco on Olympic performance.

    Having spent years and years in multiple Asian countries, I can say with confidence that Americans are far more involved in sporting and leisure activities than people from those countries. There are large swathes of the world where no one thinks that hanging out in a swimming pool is a good way to spend an afternoon. On the other hand every Tom, Dick and Harry in the States seems to go into eruptions of joy when someone says the words "Pool party".

    That's why I think the best HBD arguments are made when people from a poor country do inordinately well at some sport, especially if the sport is not something that is overwhelmingly popular in their country. Even with that, the sample sizes are too small to draw good conclusions. For instance, India dominated field hockey in the first half of the 20th century. Pakistan dominated squash for several years. They both suck in both sports these days. What changed? Certainly not the genetics. Not nutrition and training, those have only gotten better. One can't even attribute much to culture here, since these sports were never too popular in those countries to begin with. Sometimes things just happen randomly, read Nassim Taleb's Fooled by Randomness.

    For instance, India dominated field hockey in the first half of the 20th century. Pakistan dominated squash for several years. They both suck in both sports these days. What changed?

    For field hockey this has been mentioned several times recently in these comment threads due to the Olympics. The introduction of artificial turf radically changed the sport, and India and Pakistan could not afford to upgrade all of their training pitches to artificial turf; it is still a popular sport in India and Pakistan, but it is still played mostly on grass or dirt, and so most players never develop the skills required to play on artificial surfaces.

    As for squash, that is an elite sport and Pakistan dominated in an era when it was still limited to army officers and similar elite Public School types; once it became cheap enough in the post-war West to build a squash court at just about any local sports club, the available pool of talent in the West would have outstripped what Pakistan could produce; in spite of that Pakistan still were dominant in squash for a lot longer than one would have expected, late into the 20th century.

    One can’t even attribute much to culture here, since these sports were never too popular in those countries to begin with.

    Not true. Field hockey is still very popular in India and Pakistan, though cricket has certainly eclipsed it as the most popular sport since independence. You are closer to the truth with squash; it is certainly a popular elite sport in India and Pakistan, but not a sport for the commoners.

    Now as for blacks and swimming, they have plenty of access to public swimming pools and public school swim teams. There may be a “cultural” thing keeping them away from swimming, but then genes also influence culture so this isn’t something that can be easily untangled. Blacks have almost no access to ice skating rinks but we’ve seen a few black ice skaters and black ice hockey players, more than one would expect, compared to swimmers. It would not surprise me if there were genetic factors at play here, but difficult to prove definitively.

  94. @thinkingabout it
    Having access to pools or scholarships is not the only issue. If access were all that mattered, given the extensive affirmative action program in the US, every black would be a theoretical physicist. It's more about culture and what people actually do in real life. You can't make judgements about blacks' genetic swimming ability based on Olympic results, if they don't go for swimming in any large numbers or with any passion. So any HBD deductions you make are invalid, plain bad science.

    Genes, culture, access to facilities, and intensive training - they are all equally important. And unless you hold the other three close to constant, you cannot just flippantly attribute every difference in outcome to genes. Obviously, you can't create complete equality in culture, facilities and training, but it still seems farfetched to make genetic inferences when comparing countries like the US to countries like Morocco on Olympic performance.

    Having spent years and years in multiple Asian countries, I can say with confidence that Americans are far more involved in sporting and leisure activities than people from those countries. There are large swathes of the world where no one thinks that hanging out in a swimming pool is a good way to spend an afternoon. On the other hand every Tom, Dick and Harry in the States seems to go into eruptions of joy when someone says the words "Pool party".

    That's why I think the best HBD arguments are made when people from a poor country do inordinately well at some sport, especially if the sport is not something that is overwhelmingly popular in their country. Even with that, the sample sizes are too small to draw good conclusions. For instance, India dominated field hockey in the first half of the 20th century. Pakistan dominated squash for several years. They both suck in both sports these days. What changed? Certainly not the genetics. Not nutrition and training, those have only gotten better. One can't even attribute much to culture here, since these sports were never too popular in those countries to begin with. Sometimes things just happen randomly, read Nassim Taleb's Fooled by Randomness.

    For instance, India dominated field hockey in the first half of the 20th century. Pakistan dominated squash for several years. They both suck in both sports these days. What changed?

    For field hockey this has been mentioned several times recently in these comment threads due to the Olympics. The introduction of artificial turf radically changed the sport, and India and Pakistan could not afford to upgrade all of their training pitches to artificial turf; it is still a popular sport in India and Pakistan, but it is still played mostly on grass or dirt, and so most players never develop the skills required to play on artificial surfaces.

    As for squash, that is an elite sport and Pakistan dominated in an era when it was still limited to army officers and similar elite Public School types; once it became cheap enough in the post-war West to build a squash court at just about any local sports club, the available pool of talent in the West would have outstripped what Pakistan could produce; in spite of that Pakistan still were dominant in squash for a lot longer than one would have expected, late into the 20th century.

    One can’t even attribute much to culture here, since these sports were never too popular in those countries to begin with.

    Not true. Field hockey is still very popular in India and Pakistan, though cricket has certainly eclipsed it as the most popular sport since independence. You are closer to the truth with squash; it is certainly a popular elite sport in India and Pakistan, but not a sport for the commoners.

    Now as for blacks and swimming, they have plenty of access to public swimming pools and public school swim teams. There may be a “cultural” thing keeping them away from swimming, but then genes also influence culture so this isn’t something that can be easily untangled. Blacks have almost no access to ice skating rinks but we’ve seen a few black ice skaters and black ice hockey players, more than one would expect, compared to swimmers. It would not surprise me if there were genetic factors at play here, but difficult to prove definitively.

  95. @thinkingabout it
    Having access to pools or scholarships is not the only issue. If access were all that mattered, given the extensive affirmative action program in the US, every black would be a theoretical physicist. It's more about culture and what people actually do in real life. You can't make judgements about blacks' genetic swimming ability based on Olympic results, if they don't go for swimming in any large numbers or with any passion. So any HBD deductions you make are invalid, plain bad science.

    Genes, culture, access to facilities, and intensive training - they are all equally important. And unless you hold the other three close to constant, you cannot just flippantly attribute every difference in outcome to genes. Obviously, you can't create complete equality in culture, facilities and training, but it still seems farfetched to make genetic inferences when comparing countries like the US to countries like Morocco on Olympic performance.

    Having spent years and years in multiple Asian countries, I can say with confidence that Americans are far more involved in sporting and leisure activities than people from those countries. There are large swathes of the world where no one thinks that hanging out in a swimming pool is a good way to spend an afternoon. On the other hand every Tom, Dick and Harry in the States seems to go into eruptions of joy when someone says the words "Pool party".

    That's why I think the best HBD arguments are made when people from a poor country do inordinately well at some sport, especially if the sport is not something that is overwhelmingly popular in their country. Even with that, the sample sizes are too small to draw good conclusions. For instance, India dominated field hockey in the first half of the 20th century. Pakistan dominated squash for several years. They both suck in both sports these days. What changed? Certainly not the genetics. Not nutrition and training, those have only gotten better. One can't even attribute much to culture here, since these sports were never too popular in those countries to begin with. Sometimes things just happen randomly, read Nassim Taleb's Fooled by Randomness.

    For instance, India dominated field hockey in the first half of the 20th century. Pakistan dominated squash for several years. They both suck in both sports these days. What changed?

    For field hockey this has been mentioned several times recently in these comment threads due to the Olympics. The introduction of artificial turf radically changed the sport, and India and Pakistan could not afford to upgrade all of their training pitches to artificial turf; it is still a popular sport in India and Pakistan, but it is still played mostly on grass or dirt, and so most players never develop the skills required to play on artificial surfaces.

    As for squash, that is an elite sport and Pakistan dominated in an era when it was still limited to army officers and similar elite Public School types; once it became cheap enough in the post-war West to build a squash court at just about any local sports club, the available pool of talent in the West would have outstripped what Pakistan could produce; in spite of that Pakistan still were dominant in squash for a lot longer than one would have expected, late into the 20th century.

    One can’t even attribute much to culture here, since these sports were never too popular in those countries to begin with.

    Not true. Field hockey is still very popular in India and Pakistan, though cricket has certainly eclipsed it as the most popular sport since independence. You are closer to the truth with squash; it is certainly a popular elite sport in India and Pakistan, but not a sport for the commoners.

    Now as for blacks and swimming, they have plenty of access to public swimming pools and public school swim teams. There may be a “cultural” thing keeping them away from swimming, but then genes also influence culture so this isn’t something that can be easily untangled. Blacks have almost no access to ice skating rinks but we’ve seen a few black ice skaters and black ice hockey players, more than one would expect, compared to swimmers. It would not surprise me if there were genetic factors at play here, but difficult to prove definitively.

  96. “One such writer, Razib Khan, a Ph.D. candidate at the University of California-Davis’s Department of Animal Science, has been writing about human biodiversity for many years. He briefly had a job at The New York Times as a writer for its Opinion section, before Gawker reported that he’d contributed to the virulently racist Taki’s Magazine and written to VDARE.com, an anti-immigrant website.”

    As some commenter wrote, some people need to get out more. Taki’s Magazine is no more “virulently racist” than The Unz Review. That is, not at all in conventional terms.
    Funny how the writer implicitly states that the staff of The New York Times lack the google ability of Gawker’s top reporters, who simply typed “Razib Khan” and came up with some incriminating evidence.
    BTW, who finally got Razib’s gig at the NY times?

  97. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Rob in London
    Ooft! Ari Feldman is one hostile, aggressive fellow. No need to present a reasoned argument when you can just attack, attack, attack.

    Trouble is, people will find their interest piqued by his screed, come here (and to HBD Chick's blog, and elsewhere) and find that here actually do not be dragons, but some pretty interesting material.

    Bad luck, Ari! You're undoing your own "good" work.

    “and find that here actually do not be dragons….”

    Not to disagree with the gist of your post, but there do be dragons here. Metaphorically speaking–and what else is the myth of a knight mounting his steed and riding forth to do battle with a fire-breathing, hellish, devouring demon–what Sailor and others are doing when they take on the reigning dogma of those who hold the Megaphone is tantamount to slaying the proverbial dragon. It is a battle between a seemingly outgunned lone man armed with little more than his courage against a terrifying, far more powerful fire-breathing beast (our press).

    But the beast’s power turns out to be illusory in the face of true courage. As in Campbell’s Hero with a Thousand Faces and Jung’s archetype of the Hero, the protagonist must act with complete belief in himself in spite of the seeming hopelessness of his task. With this and aid from a Muse–always an inspiring woman such as she who bears the scales of Justice or bare-breasted Liberty leading the people–he will succeed.

    Van Gogh said that “just when you feel like giving up in despair is the very moment that you must push forward, for that is when the breakthrough occurs” (paraphrased). Courage is not how you behave when sitting in your favorite chair in the comfort of your living room, but how you respond when all hope is lost.

    • Replies: @dr kill
    Thanks, I needed this.
    , @dr kill
    Complete belief in himself in spite of the seeming hopelessness of his task. Thanks, I needed this.
  98. @gda
    "Until a better view of the social outcome of HBD being widely accepted is clear and believable to them, they ain’t gonna play"

    Its not real difficult for intelligent open-minded adults to grasp just exactly how ignoring the reality of HBD has negatively impacted the US for the past 50 years. The key word here is "open-minded".

    However, for progressives, identity politics trump facts every day of the week. Think of the Muslim Brotherhood. To Obama and his ilk they are natural allies - they're "progressive", they're usually brown, they've been oppressed - what's not to like?

    The fact that the Muslim Brotherhood encourages misogyny, offing gays, and other such unpleasant cultural nasties (and seem unable/unwilling to discourage the loonier, more blood-thirsty elements of their cult) is simply conveniently overlooked. To Obama they're "our kind of people".

    "They need more assurance that it doesn’t end in concentration camps, enslavement of the lessers, or it’s a non-starter, science be damned."

    It's a non-starter because it contradicts the very essence of their beliefs. To admit HBD was correct would be to admit that pretty much your whole life is based on a false premise. And they're just not ready to go there.

    Its not real difficult for intelligent open-minded adults to grasp just exactly how ignoring the reality of HBD has negatively impacted the US for the past 50 years.

    Please give some examples.

    • Replies: @gda
    Education

    Criminal justice

    Black/white relations

    And if you can't fill out the details yourself, I will have to classify you as either a troll or too unintelligent to bother wasting my time to fill you in.
    , @EH
    When less intelligent people are hired in preference to more intelligent people, bad decisions result which have huge opportunity costs. IQ by itself is a better predictor of job performance than all the usual hiring criteria combined. (see Hunter and Schmidt)

    For every Black who has a job, there are several Whites who are more competent, some of whom are unemployed or have worse jobs than the Black. The preference for Blacks has many direct victims and everyone is an indirect victim due to Blacks predictably doing worse than Whites at every job.
    , @dr kill
    Please see US Department of Education. Or check any organization requiring standardized testing. My, you are obtuse. Are you a NYFD female cadet?
  99. @Steve Sailer
    The Korean War was a series of mistakes made by the men -- Stalin, MacArthur, Mao -- who had emerged from the 1940s as huge winners. It's depressing and alarming to read up on the Korean War.

    The Korean War was a series of mistakes made by the men — Stalin, MacArthur, Mao — who had emerged from the 1940s as huge winners. It’s depressing and alarming to read up on the Korean War.

    My guess is your reply was accidentally to my comment here.

    http://www.unz.com/isteve/seth-rich-was-he-murdered-by-the-democrats-elite-or-by-the-democrats-base/#comment-1527370

  100. @Steve Richter
    How does HBD explain the wide range of IQ within an ethnic group? Same question with physical attributes. Once there is such a wide gap will not the smart ones break off into their own group or be the ones who survive a famine?

    How does HBD explain the wide range of IQ within an ethnic group? Same question with physical attributes. Once there is such a wide gap will not the smart ones break off into their own group or be the ones who survive a famine?

    There has to be high positive selection pressure. There is evidence (only correlation at this time) that some of the genes that confer higher intelligence carry with them deleterious effects (the need for eyeglasses, Tay-Sachs, etc.) and a larger brain has a higher caloric demand. For two examples, in an environment where calories are usually obtained without much planning, the positive pressure for a larger brain would be lower; and to a hunter good eyesight has high value that would select against a gene that confers intelligence with the price of poorer eyesight.

  101. @Steve Sailer
    I don't know if I've ever written about the Khazar hypothesis. (I don't even know how to spell Kzahar ...) I'm vaguely interested in it because it was promoted by Arthur Koestler, who was a glamorous figure when I was young. But the genomic studies in the 21st Century have found very little evidence to support it.

    If there is an HBD crowd angle on Jewish ancestral genetics, it's in calling attention to the sizable Italian contribution to Ashkenazi ancestry. I wrote in 2013: "Genetic research on the ancestry of Jewish populations tends to get politicized because of the sneaking suspicion that the average Palestinian may be more closely related to the Hebrews of 70 AD than is, say, Bibi Netanyahu."

    I put up pictures of Netanyahu with Arafat and Netanyahu with Berlusconi:

    http://isteve.blogspot.com/2013/10/nicholas-wade-on-ashkenazi-ancestry.html

    I'd say that Netanyahu looks more like Berlusconi than he looks like Arafat.

    For comparison, here's Netanyahu with his old pal Mitt Romney, who is pretty heavily English:

    http://images.csmonitor.com/csm/2012/09/ROMNEY_FOREIGN_POLICY_23067687.jpg?alias=standard_600x400

    Berlusconi ! I’d been wondering who the British businessman Dan Wagner reminded me of

  102. @anon
    Before Tiger Woods, I’m sure some “hbd-aware” redneck would have thought that Blacks (half-blacks, to be precise) were terrible at golf because of poor impulse control, or too many fast twitch muscle fibers, or poor hand-eye coordination.

    Maybe, but without HBD blogs, dumb rednecks would have thought the same thing for dumber reasons.

    People seem to think that dumb rednecks would never come up with dumb ideas on their own, without people explaining to them the scientific facts.

    Should people not talk about facts, because dumb people will think dumb things? Isn't it better that they have some idea of the actual facts, instead of just thinking dumb things for no rational reason, like they would anyway?

    Pretty sure, pre-Tiger, dumb rednecks thought blacks were bad at golf because they couldn’t afford club memberships.

    Ask Sailer, there used to be a bunch of black golf pros who grew up with part-time jobs as caddies.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    From 1961-1986 or so, five different black golf pros won a total of 23 PGA tournaments. Also, blacks were doing well on the Senior Tour in the decade before Tiger arrived.
    , @Brutusale
    Jim Dent, Lee Elder and Calvin Peete obviously lived (and played golf) in vain.
  103. @thinkingabout it
    Very true. I keep seeing commenters come up with outrageous statements like "Donald trump is going to get the largest share of the black vote of any Republican candidate in the last 50 years!".
    And then we have multiple actual polls showing blacks backing Hillary like 99 to 1. The altright was attractive to me primarily because it had less groupthink and bias than the mainstream, but as our popularity grows that no longer seems to be the case.

    Well, in defense of the “blacks for Trump” thesis, as of a while ago
    1. “High est black vote since 1970” means something like 16%.
    2. Trump could have been expected to hit that based on style, nationalism and black-latino/black-muslim tension.
    3. It assumed that Trump had some kind of a plan.

  104. @Boethiuss
    "Meanwhile, we also know that the MSM will fabricate anything, which means it’s entirely reasonable to suspect that the media and allied pollsters will fabricate polling data."

    As it pertains to the current polling data (or mainstream polling data as an aggregate), this is just ignorant. Pollsters can make mistakes, they can also fall to groupthink, but in general at least they are not fabricating.

    There are many ways a poll can be wrong short of outright fabrication. You can (either intentionally or unintentionally) sample a group that does not really consist of likely voters or which contains more Democrats than the general population. You can ask questions that are biased – the way you phrase a question changes the results. You can live in a society where people are afraid/embarrassed to tell you who they are really voting for. Etc.

  105. Do you now feel equally close to your African ancestors? – Ari Feldman asks Carl Zimmer.

    The question must have shocked Zimmer, who grew up thinking he was half Polish Jew and half Mayflower Puritan. And has zero African (Bantu) markers.

  106. Wow, if I am a racist for being a Taki / Vdare reader imagine what I am for occasionally visiting Stormfront.

  107. @epebble
    In case of India and field hockey, the explanation seems to be the transition from natural turf to AstroTurf. Lacking the funds needed to go AstroTurf and also probably lack of desire to go from natural to man made turf, they lost their advantage.

    Technological changes can be dramatic. Detroit faded when gas prices went up forcing cars to go small - Japanese were good in miniaturizing mechanical stuff that American manufacturers were not. When cell phones went digital, Motorola, king of radios for half century faded away while Samsung became the new king. When Photography went digital, Kodak and Polaroid faded.

    Other stuff happens too – societies age or change or lose their focus, there are internal cultural factors, etc. Japan was the king of miniature portable electronics from the moment the transistor radio was invented and yet the cell phone race was won by Korean Samsung and LG (and the “Walkman” of the 2000s was an American Apple iPod)and not Japanese Sony and Panasonic. No way that would have happened 30 years ago. Sometimes countries just lose their mojo in a particular field. You have to fight the battle fresh every day and sometimes you run out of steam and there is a young hungry upstart at your heels the moment you slow down. Now the Chinese are going after the Koreans in cell phones.

  108. @Grauniad
    Far from Steve's rote, ironic-Holocaust memery in that direction, this article is great for "HBD Chick." This article is great for Steve-- I'd wager it made his 2016; who'd need something as trite as an election, when your "rivals" in "The Media" are blurbing you again? You can tell that the writer of the piece is mad, but not exactly why. He greatly overrates the scoff factor that is here expected to go with "discussion of races." There are enough Forward readers who discuss literally nothing else-- a psychological dodge, as Sigmund Sailer would diagnose it -- that the column only tips them off to another racial kibbitzer instead of scaring away the subscribers. This article is the equivalent of MTV announcing, "Don't watch our new primetime soap opera series because you'd be offended by all the teen sex it portrays!"

    As Trump knows, just getting the MSM to acknowledge you exist is a victory. The fact that Feldman feels compelled to mention Steve’s name in order to refute him instead of just totally ignoring him means that Steve is now too big and important to ignore (don’t let it go to your head).

    Of course the “refutation” consists mostly of pointing and sputtering and putting scare quotes around “race” and various other non-sequiturs, but hey, it’s a start.

    • Replies: @Chrisnonymous
    Keep in mind, the article is not about Steve but about HBD. Also, like SPLC, writers need to keep dredging up scary topics. The article shows little familiarity with its subjects. I suspect Feldman just stumbled on some Tweets by accident, followed some links back to HBD chick and iSteve and voila: article!
  109. @thinkingabout it
    You have to admit, Steve, some of the stuff on HBD posted in these environs can be poorly thought out, outlandish, or plain stupid. A difference between groups does not automatically provide evidence for HBD. You, as a smart individual with good analytical skills, can see this. Many of your commenters can't. And your commenters come from a highly selected group with high mean IQ. One can only imagine what happens when 90 IQ dummies in Appalachia start getting into these ideas. Ideas like all Chinese people are merely grinds, and that white folk like themselves have the unique gift of "creativity", while ignoring the fact that up until about 300 years ago Chinese art and craft were considered the most exquisite in the world.

    Take the Olympics, for instance. While I find it quite likely that Blacks have some genetic advantages in running, there are a lot of other racial quirks in the Olympics' results whose mechanism aren't so clear cut. Are Whites really good at swimming because of fat distribution and arm span? Or is it just the fact that it's mostly middle-class or upper-class people who have good access to pools, and the training that's required to become a world-class swimmer?

    Before Tiger Woods, I'm sure some "hbd-aware" redneck would have thought that Blacks (half-blacks, to be precise) were terrible at golf because of poor impulse control, or too many fast twitch muscle fibers, or poor hand-eye coordination. Sounds plausible, but I think the far more likely explanation is that blacks simply don't play golf in anything approaching the numbers of Asians and Whites. Before that black chick won the gymnastics medal this year, I'm sure there were a bunch of people saying the same thing about heavy bone structure in blacks, and their unsuitability for the finesse of gymnastics. While ignoring the fact that most black chicks don't do gymnastics at the same rate as Whites do.

    HBD is real, but the tendencies of idiots to run with their biases is equally real. Once HBD becomes more popular, you can rest assured that popular discourse on it will become so detached from reality that it will make today's PC shibboleths seem like the apex of human rationality.

    Those who work on the HBD of sex differences, of course, are on more solid ground. This is Steven Pinker's main argument in The Blank Slate, where he eschews analyzing racial differences in favor of sex differences. Granted, there are a lot of people out there who try to biologise sex differences which are highly culturally generated, but the sexists have the fact that men have an entire Y chromosome worth of difference going for them.

    thinkingaboutrat says:

    “….Before that black chick won the gymnastics medal this year, I’m sure there were a bunch of people saying the same thing about heavy bone structure in blacks, and their unsuitability for the finesse of gymnastics. While ignoring the fact that most black chicks don’t do gymnastics at the same rate as Whites do. ….”

    The real problem here is that in nowadays environment it doesn’t take too much for one to be called plain stupid,90 IQ dummy in Appalachia,redneck,idiot …

    Few years ago, Italian Gymnastics Federation spokesperson David Ciaralli was trying to defend a young national team athlete after she made a snarky comments about the Italians needed to have black skin to beat rivals like Simone Biles.

    At face value, the comment sounds tasteless and racist.

    But then , Ciaralli tried to clarify the context in which the unfortunate comment was made:

    She was referring to “ a trend in gymnastics at this moment, which is going towards a technique that opens up new chances to athletes of color (well-known for power)” while penalizing the more artistic Eastern European style that allowed Russians and Romanians to dominate the sport for years.

    Could it be a case? Who knows.
    After all, a creative tempering with a rules and criteria to adopt to certain traits of the certain groups is something that totaly never happens in this country.

    That just reminded me of something called a firefighter exam.

    Oh,I know.

    You ‘re going to tell me how I’m ignoring the fact that most black chicks don’t do firefighting at the same rate as Whites do.
    Or is it just the fact that it’s mostly middle-class or upper-class people who have good access to fire hoses (damn Bull Connor!), and the training that’s required to become a world-class fire-chief?

    Anyway,instead of spirited debate among the experts , we had a usual situation of social justice grinding aparatus,( also well-known for power) being prestissimo activated to smear a miserable racist spokeperson:

    David Ciaralli defended Ferlito in a way that recalled statements that led to the firing of Dodgers’ general manager Al Campanis in 1987

    And then we got this unorthodox, gawkeresque piece of cognitive dissonance from an orthodox ex -gymnast that’s just begging for a Steve’s deconstruction:

    What is this belief based on? That’s where Ciaralli’s remarks about artistry come in.

    They are part of a larger ongoing conversation amongst coaches, athletes, judges, and fans as to the direction of the sport, on whether it moves in a more artistic direction or towards power and tricks, as though those are mutually exclusive categories. Most of these debates usually end with artistry supporters reminding everyone that the sport is called “artistic gymnastics,” never mind that no one can agree what “artistry” in gymnastics means.

    http://deadspin.com/simone-biles-vs-the-racists-are-black-gymnasts-the-ne-1443998882

    • Replies: @dr kill
    Dude, in sport there are scores. In competitions, there are judges. Sport is for men, competition is how extravaganzas such as the Olympic Games attract female viewers and ratings. I personally find synchronized competition such as diving and swimming and ribbon twirling most risible but that's just me.
  110. @Broski
    I dunno, methinks Mr. Feldman understands exactly that HBD is true, and wants to let the Jewish Daily Forward's readers know so, too. Hence, it is "a piece of the 'alt-right' puzzle of bigotry you need to know more about." Obviously, he can't say it's true in the Forward, or that would be another useful footnote for future reference, a la Saletan's admission of many years ago. In fairness, he does link to you, Razib, and HBD Chick toward the top of the article, which has probably just created a thousand or more new, Jewish HBD realists. Unfortunately, said realists may be dishonest about it, as we can assume Gould, Lewontin, and their ilk have been. Do some people just not care, at all, about lying?

    Sailer, who founded the Human Biodiversity Institute, maintains a blog at the Unz Review, writing about the dating prospects of Asian men and the inadequacies of gay men and lesbians, among other things.
     
    LOL!

    PS, something humorous (hopefully this won't be enough to out me to the Mossad, but I'm sure Google has already told them about us all): The ad at the top of the Forward was for something called JScreen, which screens Jewish people for (almost always neurological, I wonder why) Jewish recessive genetic disorders! LOLOLOLOL!

    For more: https://jscreen.org . In fairness, though, I have to wonder whether that chick in JScreen's picture is a Shiksa.

    Damn! I must have missed the part about “the inadequacies of gay men and lesbians”. I’m gonna have to go search the archives.

    • Replies: @Hunsdon
    Our host should really have a tag for that.
  111. @former darfur
    Blacks have never voted 99% any particular way because if nothing else they tend to make mistakes and pull the wrong lever. Seventy to ninety percent margins are typical with blacks: much higher than 95 indicates vote fraud since at least five percent will either screw up or get a wild hair at the last minute.

    Trump probably will get a few percent higher percentage of the black vote than would be otherwise expected because of his pimpin' lifestyle and perceived great wealth. It would have to be a very, very tight race for that to matter.

    It would be interesting to turn the question around and ask: what's the least lopsided the black results have ever been in a state or congressional election, and why. Has there ever been a fifty-fifty black vote? And what were its circumstances?

    The only President to obtain over 89% of the Black vote was Obama.
    Bill Clinton only received 83% of the Black vote in 1992.
    John Kerry obtained 89% of the Black vote in 2004

    • Replies: @Former Darfur
    Which Presidential candidate got the lowest percentage above 50% of votes of those who received the largest percentage of black votes?
  112. @Steve Sailer
    I don't know if I've ever written about the Khazar hypothesis. (I don't even know how to spell Kzahar ...) I'm vaguely interested in it because it was promoted by Arthur Koestler, who was a glamorous figure when I was young. But the genomic studies in the 21st Century have found very little evidence to support it.

    If there is an HBD crowd angle on Jewish ancestral genetics, it's in calling attention to the sizable Italian contribution to Ashkenazi ancestry. I wrote in 2013: "Genetic research on the ancestry of Jewish populations tends to get politicized because of the sneaking suspicion that the average Palestinian may be more closely related to the Hebrews of 70 AD than is, say, Bibi Netanyahu."

    I put up pictures of Netanyahu with Arafat and Netanyahu with Berlusconi:

    http://isteve.blogspot.com/2013/10/nicholas-wade-on-ashkenazi-ancestry.html

    I'd say that Netanyahu looks more like Berlusconi than he looks like Arafat.

    For comparison, here's Netanyahu with his old pal Mitt Romney, who is pretty heavily English:

    http://images.csmonitor.com/csm/2012/09/ROMNEY_FOREIGN_POLICY_23067687.jpg?alias=standard_600x400

    The Khazar thing was just slander to make HBDer’s sound tin foil hattish and nutsy. It was like assuming (before Trump killed that meme) that all Republicans were holy rolling Christian fundamentalists. You have to look at these things from inside the coastal urban sophisticate bubble – he is looking for things that will enable him to dismiss you (and enable his friends and readers to dismiss you) as an unserious person and not an intellectual equal whose arguments need to be taken seriously. Meanwhile, someone like Sabrina Rubin Erdely is automatically entitled to the benefit of the doubt even if she writes about rapes on broken glass tables in the dark, because she is one of them.

    • Replies: @Tracy
    "Intellectual equal"? That hack can't hold a candle to Mr. Sailer.
  113. The reality is somewhere in-between, where, for example, a genetic predisposition to asthma (more common among Jews) may be worsened by living in smoggy Mexico City or mitigated by moving to Phoenix. The science of that in-between is called epigenetics, the study of the environmental effect on gene expression.

    Is it really epigenetics that would predict that asthmatics suffer worse symptoms in places with more respiratory irritants?

    Human biodiversity is stuck at the moment when geneticists were able to show that distinct ethnic and geographical populations have distinct genomes and are therefore distinguishable from other groups (albeit under a microscope). The evidence of these genetic isolates is, for the HBD community, evidence of different races.

    This guy evidently needs a microscope to tell a West African and a Swede apart.

    • Replies: @dr kill
    Or his rectum from a hole in the ground.
    , @Pericles

    This guy evidently needs a microscope to tell a West African and a Swede apart.

     

    It should be said it's getting harder every day.
  114. @Broski
    I dunno, methinks Mr. Feldman understands exactly that HBD is true, and wants to let the Jewish Daily Forward's readers know so, too. Hence, it is "a piece of the 'alt-right' puzzle of bigotry you need to know more about." Obviously, he can't say it's true in the Forward, or that would be another useful footnote for future reference, a la Saletan's admission of many years ago. In fairness, he does link to you, Razib, and HBD Chick toward the top of the article, which has probably just created a thousand or more new, Jewish HBD realists. Unfortunately, said realists may be dishonest about it, as we can assume Gould, Lewontin, and their ilk have been. Do some people just not care, at all, about lying?

    Sailer, who founded the Human Biodiversity Institute, maintains a blog at the Unz Review, writing about the dating prospects of Asian men and the inadequacies of gay men and lesbians, among other things.
     
    LOL!

    PS, something humorous (hopefully this won't be enough to out me to the Mossad, but I'm sure Google has already told them about us all): The ad at the top of the Forward was for something called JScreen, which screens Jewish people for (almost always neurological, I wonder why) Jewish recessive genetic disorders! LOLOLOLOL!

    For more: https://jscreen.org . In fairness, though, I have to wonder whether that chick in JScreen's picture is a Shiksa.

    which has probably just created a thousand or more new, Jewish HBD realists

    Do that many people read the Forward?

  115. @Anonymous
    If you include the commenters, both iSteve and Taki’s are racist sites, but you can’t blame Steve and Taki for what their nuttiest commenters post.

    So racism = nutty?

    What do you find nutty about racism?

    What do you find nutty about racism?

    You’re right; I am identifying being nutty with being racist and I will concede that not all racists are nutty.

    My concern is this: Almost every iSteve post draws at least a few juvenile comments that almost everybody would consider racist and that add nothing to the discussion. It may feel good to post that sort of thing, but all it does is make it easier for e.g. the Forward to portray Steve as a crackpot, which he most assuredly is not.

    Now, there are many other posts on iSteve that most people would consider racist, but which are nevertheless true and should be read by everyone. But too many of the first kind of post means nobody will stick around to read the second kind of post.

    • Replies: @Bert
    Yeah, nobody's here, including me and you.
    , @yowza

    Now, there are many other posts on iSteve that most people would consider racist, but which are nevertheless true and should be read by everyone. But too many of the first kind of post means nobody will stick around to read the second kind of post.
     
    Your thinking is muddled, and I suspect it is because you're lazy. Many of the comments will be "racist," since "racism" is the act of denoting personal or social benefits or deficiencies related to a particular race.

    Stop using the term "racist" as the swiss army knife word to whittle down any fact or assertion that makes you feel bad, or you'll keep looking foolish.

    You could say "cheap shot," or "anecdotal evidence" to communicate your ire, but using "racist" pejoratively is just you being an "self-sanctimonious, manipulative, lazy turd."

    Grow up.
    , @bomag
    So, as usual, we have to carefully monitor our comments lest a Badthought slip through.

    Meanwhile, the Left can say anything leftist and just rack up more Pokemon points.

  116. My speed-reading takeaway: the Kardasians are Jewish.

  117. @Steve Sailer
    I don't know if I've ever written about the Khazar hypothesis. (I don't even know how to spell Kzahar ...) I'm vaguely interested in it because it was promoted by Arthur Koestler, who was a glamorous figure when I was young. But the genomic studies in the 21st Century have found very little evidence to support it.

    If there is an HBD crowd angle on Jewish ancestral genetics, it's in calling attention to the sizable Italian contribution to Ashkenazi ancestry. I wrote in 2013: "Genetic research on the ancestry of Jewish populations tends to get politicized because of the sneaking suspicion that the average Palestinian may be more closely related to the Hebrews of 70 AD than is, say, Bibi Netanyahu."

    I put up pictures of Netanyahu with Arafat and Netanyahu with Berlusconi:

    http://isteve.blogspot.com/2013/10/nicholas-wade-on-ashkenazi-ancestry.html

    I'd say that Netanyahu looks more like Berlusconi than he looks like Arafat.

    For comparison, here's Netanyahu with his old pal Mitt Romney, who is pretty heavily English:

    http://images.csmonitor.com/csm/2012/09/ROMNEY_FOREIGN_POLICY_23067687.jpg?alias=standard_600x400

    Arthur Koestler was a Hungarian Jew and in my experience Hungarians of Jewish background assimilate and/or become secular at a fairly high rate. In fact, the most nationalist Hungarians I have known were of Jewish background. This may have to do with the fact that Hungarian nationality seems to me to be more language based than ethnic or religion based.

    The original Khazar thesis was based on an idea promoted I think by another assimilated Hungarian Jew in the late 19th C. The idea was that Jews were just another Central Asian tribe, like most of the other peoples who live in Hungary (Hungary is a large ethnic mix, it’s the language that holds it together: some Hungarian here can correct me). In a way, this argues that Jews are just Europeans like everyone else, forget about the Deicide bit or the King David bit or the Holy Land. I think it is wrong, in an absolute sense, but it is probably true in at least a partial sense, because there were several groups in Russia (as we have discussed) who practiced something similar to Judaism and some of those people married into East European Jewish communities (I think Ariel Sharon is the one everyone mentions.)

    Koestler got hold of the idea in the 1970’s because he wanted to argue against the Jewish obsession with Zionism. (Koestler also was active in Zionism in the 1930’s, in addition to being active in communism). That was the point of his book. When people talk about Khazars nowadays however they are doing it primarily to argue that Zionism is fraudulent, which is not what Koestler was trying to say. The later fellow, Shlomo Sand (an Israeli), has recently (last 15 years) argued something similar.

    So basically the big argument is whether “Jews” are “Europeans” or “Middle Easterners” (we are setting aside the numerous Jewish people of non-white (e.g., Ethiopian) ancestry). HBD actually supports the MENA origins, at least to about 50%, the other 50% being usually earmarked as “Italian” which makes a lot of sense to the casual observations of everyone and including in Frank Zappa’s “Dancing Fool”.

    I think there’s a problem with promoting genetics (“I can trace my ancestry back to the pyramids”) versus the fairly obvious European nature of every Ashkenazi and Sephardic Jew I have ever met (and including Algerian Jews).

    • Agree: Travis
    • Replies: @Jack D
    Sharon's mother was of Subbotnik descent. Outside of Israel, the Subbotniks were physically isolated from the rest of Russian (actually Polish) Jews and did not intermarry. The Khazars are middle easternish (Turkic) but the Subbotniks were pure Russian Christian peasants who adopted a fruity religion, except that instead of becoming 7th Day Adventists or Mormons or something, they decided to become Jews. The reason that they were physically isolated is that before the partition of Poland, Russia proper didn't have Jews and even after Jews were only allowed to live in the Pale (the conquered area) unless they had special permission. So there is not a big Subbotnik (or other E. European) component in the Ashkenazi genome even though they lived in E. Europe for many hundreds of years. Intermarriage was rare and usually meant leaving the Jewish community (just like Amish who marry English are usually not Amish anymore).

    In addition to the Khazars, you also had the Karaites, who (like the Samaritans) accept the Hebrew Bible but not the Talmud. For some reason the Nazis didn't persecute Karaites - their beef was with Rabbinic Judaism. So when the Germans showed up, some Hungarian Jews decided that they were really Karaites.

    Hungarian Jewry (until the Germans showed up) was sort of a preview of the track that American Jews are now on, except that the Hungarian Jews were a century or so ahead. The only difference is that in Hungary, assimilation often took the form of formal conversion to Catholicism - most American Jews don't even bother since the elite religion is atheism.
  118. @anon
    When you have intimate knowledge of a subject, it becomes glaringly obvious to you how much the media get it wrong when they report on it. Mostly it's out of incompetence or laziness and not malice.

    In this case of this forward writer, he appears to be incompetent.

    Incompetence and malice are not mutually exclusive…

    • Replies: @Bill Jones
    Look at Hillary.
  119. @Anonymous
    Well that's because it's personal with you. You were part of that MR crowd that had that feud with Razib and GNXP about a decade ago. I'm not a big Razib fan myself but he's quite sharp and erudite.

    Well that’s because it’s personal with you.

    Not in the least. The problem is that his ability to do “science” stops when he encounters analysis that quantifies the fact that native populations are harmed by the presence of immigrants like Razib. When it’s politically expedient, he actually denies that living things have an interest in staying alive! Here’s one of his comments on Salter and EGI:

    http://www.gnxp.com/MT2/archives/003501.html

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Like I said, it's personal with you. He disputed an issue that has moral significance to you. Regardless of one's position on Salter's views, Salter himself states at the outset of his work that he's not attempting to describe how biological organisms actually behave, which means he's taking a controversial meta position that's open to dispute.
  120. @Steve Sailer
    The Korean War was a series of mistakes made by the men -- Stalin, MacArthur, Mao -- who had emerged from the 1940s as huge winners. It's depressing and alarming to read up on the Korean War.

    I have to wonder what the Korean War has to do with this, since my father went back in August 1950 to keep his 1945 rank, and then spent close to a year there, from Inchon to Chosin and back to Seoul. My impression is that all sides went as far as they could go, as long as it was easy, then when they met resistance (Pusan, Chosin) they had trouble backing down. But I’d be interested in hearing more about this.

  121. While idling for the big scoop in-between two Monahans, a gifted journalist can always put Philando Castile and a black and brown gymnasts’ bodies in the same paragraph:

    http://www.rollingstone.com/sports/us-womens-gymnastics-teams-greatness-is-revolutionary-w432948

  122. race doesn’t exist – blacks don’t exist – allahu akbar

  123. @SPMoore8
    Arthur Koestler was a Hungarian Jew and in my experience Hungarians of Jewish background assimilate and/or become secular at a fairly high rate. In fact, the most nationalist Hungarians I have known were of Jewish background. This may have to do with the fact that Hungarian nationality seems to me to be more language based than ethnic or religion based.

    The original Khazar thesis was based on an idea promoted I think by another assimilated Hungarian Jew in the late 19th C. The idea was that Jews were just another Central Asian tribe, like most of the other peoples who live in Hungary (Hungary is a large ethnic mix, it's the language that holds it together: some Hungarian here can correct me). In a way, this argues that Jews are just Europeans like everyone else, forget about the Deicide bit or the King David bit or the Holy Land. I think it is wrong, in an absolute sense, but it is probably true in at least a partial sense, because there were several groups in Russia (as we have discussed) who practiced something similar to Judaism and some of those people married into East European Jewish communities (I think Ariel Sharon is the one everyone mentions.)

    Koestler got hold of the idea in the 1970's because he wanted to argue against the Jewish obsession with Zionism. (Koestler also was active in Zionism in the 1930's, in addition to being active in communism). That was the point of his book. When people talk about Khazars nowadays however they are doing it primarily to argue that Zionism is fraudulent, which is not what Koestler was trying to say. The later fellow, Shlomo Sand (an Israeli), has recently (last 15 years) argued something similar.

    So basically the big argument is whether "Jews" are "Europeans" or "Middle Easterners" (we are setting aside the numerous Jewish people of non-white (e.g., Ethiopian) ancestry). HBD actually supports the MENA origins, at least to about 50%, the other 50% being usually earmarked as "Italian" which makes a lot of sense to the casual observations of everyone and including in Frank Zappa's "Dancing Fool".

    I think there's a problem with promoting genetics ("I can trace my ancestry back to the pyramids") versus the fairly obvious European nature of every Ashkenazi and Sephardic Jew I have ever met (and including Algerian Jews).

    Sharon’s mother was of Subbotnik descent. Outside of Israel, the Subbotniks were physically isolated from the rest of Russian (actually Polish) Jews and did not intermarry. The Khazars are middle easternish (Turkic) but the Subbotniks were pure Russian Christian peasants who adopted a fruity religion, except that instead of becoming 7th Day Adventists or Mormons or something, they decided to become Jews. The reason that they were physically isolated is that before the partition of Poland, Russia proper didn’t have Jews and even after Jews were only allowed to live in the Pale (the conquered area) unless they had special permission. So there is not a big Subbotnik (or other E. European) component in the Ashkenazi genome even though they lived in E. Europe for many hundreds of years. Intermarriage was rare and usually meant leaving the Jewish community (just like Amish who marry English are usually not Amish anymore).

    In addition to the Khazars, you also had the Karaites, who (like the Samaritans) accept the Hebrew Bible but not the Talmud. For some reason the Nazis didn’t persecute Karaites – their beef was with Rabbinic Judaism. So when the Germans showed up, some Hungarian Jews decided that they were really Karaites.

    Hungarian Jewry (until the Germans showed up) was sort of a preview of the track that American Jews are now on, except that the Hungarian Jews were a century or so ahead. The only difference is that in Hungary, assimilation often took the form of formal conversion to Catholicism – most American Jews don’t even bother since the elite religion is atheism.

    • Replies: @Mike Zwick
    " the elite religion is atheism." The elite religion is Pious Puritanical Political Correctness. We are all expected to seek absolution for our original sin of racism/sexism/homophobia/islamophobia.
    , @SPMoore8
    I agree with everything you say except that IIRC there is a long tradition of "Judaizers" in Russia going back to medieval times, and perhaps there's some crossover there, too.

    Now that we have established that Ari Feldman is wrong to attribute the "Khazar thesis" to HBD generally, I will devote the rest of my remarks to what I believe is his wrong construal of "epigenetics."

    The "Nature" (genetics) vs. "Nurture" (environment) is understood to be interactive, since genetic propensities in one area (see the MAOA gene issue as discussed earlier) can be aggravated by the environment. On a common sense level this is nothing more than the recognition that if certain types of cancers run in your family, you should get more regular checkups, or, if early congestive heart disease runs in your family, you should try to surmount it by exercise and diet (from what I have seen, with limited success, unfortunately.)

    However, "epigenetics" is not some sort of half way house between the two. It argues that specific environmental pressures can actually trigger changes in the gene. Again, I think the classic case has to do with Dutchmen during the WW2 era famine, that supposedly changed the gene expression which was then passed on to their kids. That this sounds like Lamarckianism (Giraffes have long necks because they were always stretching them to get to the higher branches) or Lysenkoism (soaking wheat in cold water will turn it into winter wheat) -- both long discredited -- is not my fault.

    I think my main problem with "epigenetics" is that it supposes a kind of rationalizing and and intentionalizing of genetic mutations that contradicts the randomness of mutation that is implicit in evolution. On the other hand it is not about environment affecting actual life development; as though the offspring of a couple of morons is only a nutritious school lunch away from being a neurosurgeon.
    , @Bee
    The statement that Ariel Sharon's mother was of Subbotnik descent is unproven at best. "Subbotnik ancestry" for Israelis is a kind of urban myth.
  124. @Mark Caplan

    H.L. Mencken Club, one of 40 hate groups in Pennsylvania


     

    The link mistakenly went to HBD Chick. Here maybe is the link you intended:

    http://www.phillymag.com/news/2015/03/19/hate-groups-pennsylvania-splc/

    My favs in the list are "radical traditional Catholicism" and "general hate."

    My favs in the list are “radical traditional Catholicism” and “general hate.”

    That’s my ideology. I am an advocate of general hate. We’re a beleaguered faction, admittedly, but one day, we hope to spread general hatred across society. Will you join us in our noble struggle?

    • Replies: @dr kill
    Count me in.
  125. The Blank Slate, so essential to Marxism, is equally beloved by the Multicultural know nothings of the West….The massive contradictions produced by such nonsensical and anti-scientific beliefs are unimportant collateral damage to these didactic fools…..

  126. @thinkingabout it
    You have to admit, Steve, some of the stuff on HBD posted in these environs can be poorly thought out, outlandish, or plain stupid. A difference between groups does not automatically provide evidence for HBD. You, as a smart individual with good analytical skills, can see this. Many of your commenters can't. And your commenters come from a highly selected group with high mean IQ. One can only imagine what happens when 90 IQ dummies in Appalachia start getting into these ideas. Ideas like all Chinese people are merely grinds, and that white folk like themselves have the unique gift of "creativity", while ignoring the fact that up until about 300 years ago Chinese art and craft were considered the most exquisite in the world.

    Take the Olympics, for instance. While I find it quite likely that Blacks have some genetic advantages in running, there are a lot of other racial quirks in the Olympics' results whose mechanism aren't so clear cut. Are Whites really good at swimming because of fat distribution and arm span? Or is it just the fact that it's mostly middle-class or upper-class people who have good access to pools, and the training that's required to become a world-class swimmer?

    Before Tiger Woods, I'm sure some "hbd-aware" redneck would have thought that Blacks (half-blacks, to be precise) were terrible at golf because of poor impulse control, or too many fast twitch muscle fibers, or poor hand-eye coordination. Sounds plausible, but I think the far more likely explanation is that blacks simply don't play golf in anything approaching the numbers of Asians and Whites. Before that black chick won the gymnastics medal this year, I'm sure there were a bunch of people saying the same thing about heavy bone structure in blacks, and their unsuitability for the finesse of gymnastics. While ignoring the fact that most black chicks don't do gymnastics at the same rate as Whites do.

    HBD is real, but the tendencies of idiots to run with their biases is equally real. Once HBD becomes more popular, you can rest assured that popular discourse on it will become so detached from reality that it will make today's PC shibboleths seem like the apex of human rationality.

    Those who work on the HBD of sex differences, of course, are on more solid ground. This is Steven Pinker's main argument in The Blank Slate, where he eschews analyzing racial differences in favor of sex differences. Granted, there are a lot of people out there who try to biologise sex differences which are highly culturally generated, but the sexists have the fact that men have an entire Y chromosome worth of difference going for them.

    One can only imagine what happens when 90 IQ dummies in Appalachia start getting into these ideas

    One can understand why the article mentions commenters like you.

    • Replies: @Broski

    One can understand why the article mentions commenters like you.

     

    Indeed. One wonders what his opinion is about BLM and the Obama administration fomenting hate among 85 IQ blacks everywhere. For some reason riling up 90 IQ whites is dangerous, but riling up blacks is not. It's not like blacks statistically tend to even greater violence than their low IQs would predict, or anything.
  127. A little off topic but there seems to be a lot of coverage of all of the sexists and racists calling Simone Biles the “Next Michael Phelps.” Has anybody even said anything like this? If they did have they ever referred to a white male athlete the same way? It seems like media manufactured angst to shame us all and how racist we all are. Ironically the coverage of her wins in this way takes away from the fact that she is a good athlete who won a buch of medals.

    • Replies: @SPMoore8
    When I was young I used to be naive enough to think that if something was written, it was worth reading about. But now I know that much of what appears in the media derives from social media in the progression twitter>Facebook>Blog>MSM and I have come to the conclusion that most of it is written by trivial people to draw attention to themselves and to curry the clicks of a specific audience (women or minorities, usually).

    Now that I have alienated at least 2/3rds of humanity I suppose someone could say the same thing about stuff white guys write. Except that I would be perfectly happy to read an analysis of HBD, the economy, immigration, or many other interesting and intellectually challenging topics except that women and minorities rarely write about such things. Now why is that?
  128. @Jack D
    Sharon's mother was of Subbotnik descent. Outside of Israel, the Subbotniks were physically isolated from the rest of Russian (actually Polish) Jews and did not intermarry. The Khazars are middle easternish (Turkic) but the Subbotniks were pure Russian Christian peasants who adopted a fruity religion, except that instead of becoming 7th Day Adventists or Mormons or something, they decided to become Jews. The reason that they were physically isolated is that before the partition of Poland, Russia proper didn't have Jews and even after Jews were only allowed to live in the Pale (the conquered area) unless they had special permission. So there is not a big Subbotnik (or other E. European) component in the Ashkenazi genome even though they lived in E. Europe for many hundreds of years. Intermarriage was rare and usually meant leaving the Jewish community (just like Amish who marry English are usually not Amish anymore).

    In addition to the Khazars, you also had the Karaites, who (like the Samaritans) accept the Hebrew Bible but not the Talmud. For some reason the Nazis didn't persecute Karaites - their beef was with Rabbinic Judaism. So when the Germans showed up, some Hungarian Jews decided that they were really Karaites.

    Hungarian Jewry (until the Germans showed up) was sort of a preview of the track that American Jews are now on, except that the Hungarian Jews were a century or so ahead. The only difference is that in Hungary, assimilation often took the form of formal conversion to Catholicism - most American Jews don't even bother since the elite religion is atheism.

    ” the elite religion is atheism.” The elite religion is Pious Puritanical Political Correctness. We are all expected to seek absolution for our original sin of racism/sexism/homophobia/islamophobia.

    • Replies: @ben tillman

    ” the elite religion is atheism.” The elite religion is Pious Puritanical Political Correctness. We are all expected to seek absolution for our original sin of racism/sexism/homophobia/islamophobia.
     
    There's nothing Puritanical about it.
  129. @Rob in London
    Ooft! Ari Feldman is one hostile, aggressive fellow. No need to present a reasoned argument when you can just attack, attack, attack.

    Trouble is, people will find their interest piqued by his screed, come here (and to HBD Chick's blog, and elsewhere) and find that here actually do not be dragons, but some pretty interesting material.

    Bad luck, Ari! You're undoing your own "good" work.

    Trouble is, people will find their interest piqued by his screed, come here (and to HBD Chick’s blog, and elsewhere)

    They might end up HBD-woke.

  130. @Jack D
    Sharon's mother was of Subbotnik descent. Outside of Israel, the Subbotniks were physically isolated from the rest of Russian (actually Polish) Jews and did not intermarry. The Khazars are middle easternish (Turkic) but the Subbotniks were pure Russian Christian peasants who adopted a fruity religion, except that instead of becoming 7th Day Adventists or Mormons or something, they decided to become Jews. The reason that they were physically isolated is that before the partition of Poland, Russia proper didn't have Jews and even after Jews were only allowed to live in the Pale (the conquered area) unless they had special permission. So there is not a big Subbotnik (or other E. European) component in the Ashkenazi genome even though they lived in E. Europe for many hundreds of years. Intermarriage was rare and usually meant leaving the Jewish community (just like Amish who marry English are usually not Amish anymore).

    In addition to the Khazars, you also had the Karaites, who (like the Samaritans) accept the Hebrew Bible but not the Talmud. For some reason the Nazis didn't persecute Karaites - their beef was with Rabbinic Judaism. So when the Germans showed up, some Hungarian Jews decided that they were really Karaites.

    Hungarian Jewry (until the Germans showed up) was sort of a preview of the track that American Jews are now on, except that the Hungarian Jews were a century or so ahead. The only difference is that in Hungary, assimilation often took the form of formal conversion to Catholicism - most American Jews don't even bother since the elite religion is atheism.

    I agree with everything you say except that IIRC there is a long tradition of “Judaizers” in Russia going back to medieval times, and perhaps there’s some crossover there, too.

    Now that we have established that Ari Feldman is wrong to attribute the “Khazar thesis” to HBD generally, I will devote the rest of my remarks to what I believe is his wrong construal of “epigenetics.”

    The “Nature” (genetics) vs. “Nurture” (environment) is understood to be interactive, since genetic propensities in one area (see the MAOA gene issue as discussed earlier) can be aggravated by the environment. On a common sense level this is nothing more than the recognition that if certain types of cancers run in your family, you should get more regular checkups, or, if early congestive heart disease runs in your family, you should try to surmount it by exercise and diet (from what I have seen, with limited success, unfortunately.)

    However, “epigenetics” is not some sort of half way house between the two. It argues that specific environmental pressures can actually trigger changes in the gene. Again, I think the classic case has to do with Dutchmen during the WW2 era famine, that supposedly changed the gene expression which was then passed on to their kids. That this sounds like Lamarckianism (Giraffes have long necks because they were always stretching them to get to the higher branches) or Lysenkoism (soaking wheat in cold water will turn it into winter wheat) — both long discredited — is not my fault.

    I think my main problem with “epigenetics” is that it supposes a kind of rationalizing and and intentionalizing of genetic mutations that contradicts the randomness of mutation that is implicit in evolution. On the other hand it is not about environment affecting actual life development; as though the offspring of a couple of morons is only a nutritious school lunch away from being a neurosurgeon.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    As I said before, "Judaizers" in Russia (same thing as Subbotniks - Sabbath observers) were, before they moved to Palestine, genetically distinct from Jews - in medieval Russia there were NO Jews. They were banned from the empire. The Russians didn't have any problem with Jews before the Partition of Poland because they didn't have any Jews. Once they did, they didn't really know how to deal with them. Poland and Lithuania had built their economies with Jews as a middleman merchant/lender class between the nobility and the peasants (and it was in this survive by your wits niche that the Jews built their legendary smarts) but Russia had nothing like this. And once they did have Jews they were in a place that was far away from the center of Subbotnik activity far to the east.
    , @Bert

    However, “epigenetics” is not some sort of half way house between the two. It argues that specific environmental pressures can actually trigger changes in the gene.
     
    Really? I thought it only referred to gene expression during the process of development. So, yes, a halfway house, one might say.
  131. @Clathrus
    Would you say that the difference in height between men and women cannot be genetic? After all, there is such a wide (and overlapping) range.

    Would you say that the difference in height between men and women cannot be genetic? After all, there is such a wide (and overlapping) range.

    Selecting for intelligence seems different that for other traits. Humans are the only animals that have increased their intelligence over evolutionary time. ( assuming that current day humans are smarter than the ones who migrated from Africa. ) Just thinking that before we accept that HBD has produced an increase in intelligence there has to be an explanation for why no other species has evolved greater intelligence

    • Replies: @ben tillman

    Selecting for intelligence seems different that for other traits. Humans are the only animals that have increased their intelligence over evolutionary time.
     
    Think about what you just said.
    , @AndrewR
    What? Are you saying dogs, dolhins, chimps, crows and elephants are no more intelligent than the first organism?
  132. @Jack D
    As Trump knows, just getting the MSM to acknowledge you exist is a victory. The fact that Feldman feels compelled to mention Steve's name in order to refute him instead of just totally ignoring him means that Steve is now too big and important to ignore (don't let it go to your head).

    Of course the "refutation" consists mostly of pointing and sputtering and putting scare quotes around "race" and various other non-sequiturs, but hey, it's a start.

    Keep in mind, the article is not about Steve but about HBD. Also, like SPLC, writers need to keep dredging up scary topics. The article shows little familiarity with its subjects. I suspect Feldman just stumbled on some Tweets by accident, followed some links back to HBD chick and iSteve and voila: article!

  133. @SPMoore8
    I agree with everything you say except that IIRC there is a long tradition of "Judaizers" in Russia going back to medieval times, and perhaps there's some crossover there, too.

    Now that we have established that Ari Feldman is wrong to attribute the "Khazar thesis" to HBD generally, I will devote the rest of my remarks to what I believe is his wrong construal of "epigenetics."

    The "Nature" (genetics) vs. "Nurture" (environment) is understood to be interactive, since genetic propensities in one area (see the MAOA gene issue as discussed earlier) can be aggravated by the environment. On a common sense level this is nothing more than the recognition that if certain types of cancers run in your family, you should get more regular checkups, or, if early congestive heart disease runs in your family, you should try to surmount it by exercise and diet (from what I have seen, with limited success, unfortunately.)

    However, "epigenetics" is not some sort of half way house between the two. It argues that specific environmental pressures can actually trigger changes in the gene. Again, I think the classic case has to do with Dutchmen during the WW2 era famine, that supposedly changed the gene expression which was then passed on to their kids. That this sounds like Lamarckianism (Giraffes have long necks because they were always stretching them to get to the higher branches) or Lysenkoism (soaking wheat in cold water will turn it into winter wheat) -- both long discredited -- is not my fault.

    I think my main problem with "epigenetics" is that it supposes a kind of rationalizing and and intentionalizing of genetic mutations that contradicts the randomness of mutation that is implicit in evolution. On the other hand it is not about environment affecting actual life development; as though the offspring of a couple of morons is only a nutritious school lunch away from being a neurosurgeon.

    As I said before, “Judaizers” in Russia (same thing as Subbotniks – Sabbath observers) were, before they moved to Palestine, genetically distinct from Jews – in medieval Russia there were NO Jews. They were banned from the empire. The Russians didn’t have any problem with Jews before the Partition of Poland because they didn’t have any Jews. Once they did, they didn’t really know how to deal with them. Poland and Lithuania had built their economies with Jews as a middleman merchant/lender class between the nobility and the peasants (and it was in this survive by your wits niche that the Jews built their legendary smarts) but Russia had nothing like this. And once they did have Jews they were in a place that was far away from the center of Subbotnik activity far to the east.

    • Replies: @SPMoore8
    We agree about Russia's general absence of Ashkenazim before the partitions: Where we don't agree is about the nature of Jewish or proto-Jewish sectarians before, in particular, the Subbotniks are not the ones I had in mind.

    See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sect_of_Skhariya_the_Jew

    In particular, the end of the entry; this is part of what I had in mind, which clearly had some Polish-Lithuanian influence. And see also:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judaizers

    Again, at the end of the entry. Here's a little more on the diversity, as well as a signal to Turkic settlements in Lithuania, not just on the hinterlands of that Commonwealth:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crimean_Karaites#Middle_Ages
  134. WhatEvvs [AKA "Mipchunk"] says:
    @thinkingabout it
    You have to admit, Steve, some of the stuff on HBD posted in these environs can be poorly thought out, outlandish, or plain stupid. A difference between groups does not automatically provide evidence for HBD. You, as a smart individual with good analytical skills, can see this. Many of your commenters can't. And your commenters come from a highly selected group with high mean IQ. One can only imagine what happens when 90 IQ dummies in Appalachia start getting into these ideas. Ideas like all Chinese people are merely grinds, and that white folk like themselves have the unique gift of "creativity", while ignoring the fact that up until about 300 years ago Chinese art and craft were considered the most exquisite in the world.

    Take the Olympics, for instance. While I find it quite likely that Blacks have some genetic advantages in running, there are a lot of other racial quirks in the Olympics' results whose mechanism aren't so clear cut. Are Whites really good at swimming because of fat distribution and arm span? Or is it just the fact that it's mostly middle-class or upper-class people who have good access to pools, and the training that's required to become a world-class swimmer?

    Before Tiger Woods, I'm sure some "hbd-aware" redneck would have thought that Blacks (half-blacks, to be precise) were terrible at golf because of poor impulse control, or too many fast twitch muscle fibers, or poor hand-eye coordination. Sounds plausible, but I think the far more likely explanation is that blacks simply don't play golf in anything approaching the numbers of Asians and Whites. Before that black chick won the gymnastics medal this year, I'm sure there were a bunch of people saying the same thing about heavy bone structure in blacks, and their unsuitability for the finesse of gymnastics. While ignoring the fact that most black chicks don't do gymnastics at the same rate as Whites do.

    HBD is real, but the tendencies of idiots to run with their biases is equally real. Once HBD becomes more popular, you can rest assured that popular discourse on it will become so detached from reality that it will make today's PC shibboleths seem like the apex of human rationality.

    Those who work on the HBD of sex differences, of course, are on more solid ground. This is Steven Pinker's main argument in The Blank Slate, where he eschews analyzing racial differences in favor of sex differences. Granted, there are a lot of people out there who try to biologise sex differences which are highly culturally generated, but the sexists have the fact that men have an entire Y chromosome worth of difference going for them.

    Excellent points.

    “and that white folk like themselves have the unique gift of “creativity”, while ignoring the fact that up until about 300 years ago Chinese art and craft were considered the most exquisite in the world.”

    That one really gets on my nerves. The Japanese are incredibly creative. Anime, manga… Americans steal from these all the time. Japanese filmmakers (borrowing from Americnas, granted) have taken our ideas, refined them, and created many great movies. The whole deadpan action hero was taken from Japanese samurai flicks. Hunger Games was likely stolen from a Japanese book/movie franchise: Battle Royale. They also make great art films, such as Departures.

    I do think that “HBD” has a grain of truth, but that it’s distorted wildly by the commenters here. Steve may be intelligent but his audience is hopeless.

  135. @yowza
    Steve, he's not saying you're wrong. He's saying the implications are terrifying to him.

    There is no shortage of misguided policy proposals that harp on the pet obsessions of the HBD community. However, at least in the blogs and forums I examined, there was little discussion of what to do with the data of “human biodiversity.”
     
    If you remember, quite a while back, there was a writer for, I believe SLATE (or Salon?), who had read about biodiversity, and concluded that, scientifically, it had to be true.

    His first question about his newfound discovery was "what do we DO with it?"

    Shortly afterwards, he was converged upon by not only the Slate readership, but also his editors, and the people who sign his checks. He recanted and apologized.

    In debates I've had with others personally on the issue, those who give me some consideration have inevitably stared at me with nervous eyes and said "okay, if you're right, what DO we do with this information?"

    If I recall, your response was using it for better social policy for the improvement of the lives of everyone, which... just isn't enough for them. They need more assurance that it doesn't end in concentration camps, enslavement of the lessers, or it's a non-starter, science be damned.

    Until a better view of the social outcome of HBD being widely accepted is clear and believable to them, they ain't gonna play. They'll play AROUND it, like Ari just did. He'll give you a little bird whistle, but until you convince him of roses on the other side, he ain't playin'.

    I’d think HBD would make one a more critical thinker when assessing the latest Fabulous New Program designed to erase the achievement gap.

  136. WhatEvvs [AKA "Mipchunk"] says:
    @thinkingabout it
    You have to admit, Steve, some of the stuff on HBD posted in these environs can be poorly thought out, outlandish, or plain stupid. A difference between groups does not automatically provide evidence for HBD. You, as a smart individual with good analytical skills, can see this. Many of your commenters can't. And your commenters come from a highly selected group with high mean IQ. One can only imagine what happens when 90 IQ dummies in Appalachia start getting into these ideas. Ideas like all Chinese people are merely grinds, and that white folk like themselves have the unique gift of "creativity", while ignoring the fact that up until about 300 years ago Chinese art and craft were considered the most exquisite in the world.

    Take the Olympics, for instance. While I find it quite likely that Blacks have some genetic advantages in running, there are a lot of other racial quirks in the Olympics' results whose mechanism aren't so clear cut. Are Whites really good at swimming because of fat distribution and arm span? Or is it just the fact that it's mostly middle-class or upper-class people who have good access to pools, and the training that's required to become a world-class swimmer?

    Before Tiger Woods, I'm sure some "hbd-aware" redneck would have thought that Blacks (half-blacks, to be precise) were terrible at golf because of poor impulse control, or too many fast twitch muscle fibers, or poor hand-eye coordination. Sounds plausible, but I think the far more likely explanation is that blacks simply don't play golf in anything approaching the numbers of Asians and Whites. Before that black chick won the gymnastics medal this year, I'm sure there were a bunch of people saying the same thing about heavy bone structure in blacks, and their unsuitability for the finesse of gymnastics. While ignoring the fact that most black chicks don't do gymnastics at the same rate as Whites do.

    HBD is real, but the tendencies of idiots to run with their biases is equally real. Once HBD becomes more popular, you can rest assured that popular discourse on it will become so detached from reality that it will make today's PC shibboleths seem like the apex of human rationality.

    Those who work on the HBD of sex differences, of course, are on more solid ground. This is Steven Pinker's main argument in The Blank Slate, where he eschews analyzing racial differences in favor of sex differences. Granted, there are a lot of people out there who try to biologise sex differences which are highly culturally generated, but the sexists have the fact that men have an entire Y chromosome worth of difference going for them.

    “but the sexists have the fact that men have an entire Y chromosome worth of difference going for them.”

    Here is an example of exactly the problem you were talking about: people who don’t know a lot about genes, talking about genes.

    It’s not only the fact that men have a Y chromosome, but that they lack the two that women have. The fact that women have two X’s and men have only one, which they inherit from their mothers, is hugely important.

    In addition to being crudely reductionist on race, most HBD dudes, including Steve, are sad, nasty little butthurt misogynists. And I do mean misogynist in the real old fashioned sense of the word. I have read Sailer for years, and his sensitivity to the fact that women may be superior to men in certain ways is very revealing. I remember one post where a Chinese trainer said that women have superior pain tolerance to men. That may be true, it may not be – pain tolerance is subjective, but my gawd, the hurt feelings.

    • Replies: @The most deplorable one

    It’s not only the fact that men have a Y chromosome, but that they lack the two that women have. The fact that women have two X’s and men have only one, which they inherit from their mothers, is hugely important.
     
    Can you explain how the fact that women have two X chromosomes and men only have one which they inherit from their mothers is hugely important?

    Are you referring, perhaps,to the process whereby a large number of genes on one X chromosome in every cell in a woman's body are inactivated? Perhaps you had in mind the averaging effect that that causes.

    Or, perhaps you were alluding to those species of Muntjacs where females have one less chromosome than males do?

    , @Jack D
    X and Y chromosomes (especially Y) both carry very few important genes, for obvious reasons - if say the gene for coding hemoglobin was on the Y gene and women lacked it, they would die and not be capable of reproduction. Or if it was on the X and women had two copies, they would make too much hemoglobin and die because of that. So very little of major physical importance (aside from things that code for the reproductive system and secondary sexual characteristics) is left on those chromosomes. Of course there are still lots of subtle differences in strength, temperament, etc. but the basics are the same even to the point that men have nipples.
    , @ben tillman

    In addition to being crudely reductionist on race, most HBD dudes, including Steve, are sad, nasty little butthurt misogynists.
     
    You're delusional, which isn't at all uncommon for people who use the term "reductionist".
    , @Expletive Deleted
    "Chinese trainer" talk out of arse. I suspect that's why people were annoyed.
    Jury's out on that one, because as you wisely note, it's subjective, i.e. the weaselly bastards all lie about it.
    Here's a grab-bag of contradictory opinions, for starters. It seems to change with the time of month, among other things!
    https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/09/140910083339.htm
    http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/story?id=97662&page=1
    http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/women-feel-pain-more-intensely/

    I recall a similar "debate" about pain and anaesthetic tolerances among mutant MC1R sufferers, or "gingers", as we are known. One lot of boffins swore blind we needed more dope to put us under but otherwise tough enough, others that we were pansies, etc. etc.
  137. @Jack D
    As I said before, "Judaizers" in Russia (same thing as Subbotniks - Sabbath observers) were, before they moved to Palestine, genetically distinct from Jews - in medieval Russia there were NO Jews. They were banned from the empire. The Russians didn't have any problem with Jews before the Partition of Poland because they didn't have any Jews. Once they did, they didn't really know how to deal with them. Poland and Lithuania had built their economies with Jews as a middleman merchant/lender class between the nobility and the peasants (and it was in this survive by your wits niche that the Jews built their legendary smarts) but Russia had nothing like this. And once they did have Jews they were in a place that was far away from the center of Subbotnik activity far to the east.

    We agree about Russia’s general absence of Ashkenazim before the partitions: Where we don’t agree is about the nature of Jewish or proto-Jewish sectarians before, in particular, the Subbotniks are not the ones I had in mind.

    See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sect_of_Skhariya_the_Jew

    In particular, the end of the entry; this is part of what I had in mind, which clearly had some Polish-Lithuanian influence. And see also:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judaizers

    Again, at the end of the entry. Here’s a little more on the diversity, as well as a signal to Turkic settlements in Lithuania, not just on the hinterlands of that Commonwealth:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crimean_Karaites#Middle_Ages

    • Replies: @Jack D
    I visited Trakai in Lithuania and saw what was left of the Karaite community (not much despite the fact that the Germans did not try to kill them).

    Nothing written in any of these entries contradicts what I said - the Karaites and the Yiddish speaking Ashkenazi Rabbinic Jews hated each other and did not intermix - the narcissism of small difference and all that. Karaites and the other Judaizing sects (aside from their religious and genetic differences and physical differences in location) did not occupy the same ecological niche as Ashkenazi Jews - they continued farming the land and serving as troops for the Lithuanian kings, etc. so they would have been an uneasy fit for the Jews in any case. If they had been another middleman minority (say Chinese) they would have been a better fit and might have eventually merged (lots of Jew-Asian hybrids in the US nowadays) but as it was, it was more like the relationship between American Ashkenazi Jews and uneducated ghetto "Black Jews" like Michelle's cousin the "rabbi" (without any actual rabbinical training), who adopted a folk Judaism . Jews considered these folks to be ignorant and unlearned (where to be learned was the highest value) and totally unsuitable candidates for marriage. Just because D'Shavious puts on a prayer shawl (upside down because he can't really read the writing) doesn't mean you are going to let him marry your daughter.

    When the Subbotniks got to Israel, they were eventually accepted as Jews (the Zionist being non-religious and in need of all the help they could get) but their contribution to the Ashkenazi Jewish genome outside of Israel is nil.
  138. WhatEvvs [AKA "Mipchunk"] says:
    @Daniel H
    >>One of the hallmarks of genetics research is that it produces data that are easy to sensationalize, such as IQ scores of black people (see: “The Bell Curve” controversy) or the supposed Khazarian origin of the Jewish people. In addition to obscuring the actual scientific consensus, these false conclusions have, in the former case, served as a license to discriminate against black people and, in the latter, provided “evidence” for those who say that Jews have no ancestral connection to the land of Israel.<<

    No Ari Feldman, it is the HBD people and their genetic statistical research who have DISPROVEN the Khazarian theory on the origin of Europe's Jews.

    “No Ari Feldman, it is the HBD people and their genetic statistical research who have DISPROVEN the Khazarian theory on the origin of Europe’s Jews.”

    No they didn’t. Geneticists did. I doubt that most of the people who comment here could tell me how many pairs of chromosomes a human being has without looking it up. And not one could explain the unique characteristics of X chromosome inheritance.

  139. @Boethiuss
    "The altright was attractive to me primarily because it had less groupthink and bias than the mainstream, but as our popularity grows that no longer seems to be the case."

    Yeah that's part of it but I think a bigger issue is relating to the mainstream. We know the mainstream has a warped view of the altright, but to some extent it goes the other direction as well.

    Altrighters (at least the ones here) delude themselves into thinking that because they have a knowledge edge relative to the mainstream pertaining to something, they have a knowledge edge over everything, and therefore can safely ignore anything inconvenient.

    “Altrighters (at least the ones here) delude themselves into thinking that because they have a knowledge edge relative to the mainstream pertaining to something, they have a knowledge edge over everything, and therefore can safely ignore anything inconvenient.”

    Your generalizations are boring and without evidence. I smell projection.

  140. @Clathrus
    We need a new political ideology that accepts HBD and makes kind and prudent decisions with genetics in mind.

    Personally I'm moving towards favouring a sort of global re-engineering using CRISPR so as to produce a clean break from all existing ethnic identities. Look at chickens. No-one really cares about the differences between various subspecies of wild junglefowl now that we have the domestic chicken. That should be the goal for humanity. A new, genetically heterogeneous & incredibly smart population more concerned with P versus NP than I versus P.

    You mean farmers and consumers don’t care about wild junglefowl. The domestic chicken has been reduced an abused piece of organic production line machinery. People will never calculate or reason as well as AI. The only future for humanity is as a self-interested, contextualized, irrational animal.

  141. We are supposed to believe we are inherently different based on our demographics — “diversity”.

    Yet any examination of those differences are likely to produce some unflattering characteristics which can be dismissed as “perpetuating racial stereotypes”.

    So what is required is a secular religion unfettered by actual evidence.

    We are supposed to accept that we are simultaneously both inherently different (diversity) and inherently the same (equality).

    Isn’t HBD in theory consistent with the state-sponsored religion of “diversity” that legions of institutions genuflect to ?

  142. However, at least in the blogs and forums I examined, there was little discussion of what to do with the data of “human biodiversity.”

    I for one don’t go in much for Master Plans, because I consider them premature. The best Master Plan for now is to slap the public awake and get them to acknowledge reality. That’s Herculean enough, I think. I figure there will be more than enough brainpower dedicated to the matter once that’s accomplished.

    When I do get into policy, I recommend simple stuff like “gee, maybe we should stop oppressing people for merely expressing their views,” and “gee, maybe we should get the gov’t O-U-T of the ‘deciding how we live our lives, who we hire and fire, where we live, etc.’ business,” and “well, for starters we can stop blaming the white race for the black race’s outcomes.”

    Most of the time when leftists ask “what do you recommend we do with this information, though?”, they’re just looking for a bloody shirt to wave, anyway.

    In debates I’ve had with others personally on the issue, those who give me some consideration have inevitably stared at me with nervous eyes and said “okay, if you’re right, what DO we do with this information?”

    If I recall, your response was using it for better social policy for the improvement of the lives of everyone, which… just isn’t enough for them. They need more assurance that it doesn’t end in concentration camps, enslavement of the lessers, or it’s a non-starter, science be damned.

    Until a better view of the social outcome of HBD being widely accepted is clear and believable to them, they ain’t gonna play. They’ll play AROUND it, like Ari just did. He’ll give you a little bird whistle, but until you convince him of roses on the other side, he ain’t playin’.

    I doubt they’re playin’ either way. But for the rare, honest interlocutor, I suggest that sweeping it all under the rug and ignoring the smoke leaking out from underneath is the worst possible option. It’s like if a politician is facing a scandal; he gets much more control over the situation if he announces it himself. Sure, he can bet everything on the hope that the scandal never comes out, but the less likely that option seems, the better off he’ll be coming clean before the scandal breaks. And the HBD scandal is already out there, so it’s really a matter of when, not if. Society is already slowly coming to grips with HBD on its own. The elite run the risk of arriving late and having no one to dance with. The longer they wait, the more likely people are to have formed their own opinions, quite independent from overriding elite concerns and obsessions.

    In short, I think there’s a compelling argument to be made for “getting out in front of this thing.”

    Funny — I feel the same way about Razib being mentioned with Steve.

    His writing’s atrocious, but I haven’t really paid enough attention to find out if that’s because ESL, or mental issues, or what. His personality is too repellent (arrogant, petty tyrant subcon; it’s in the genes) for the topic to hold much interest.

    But here, us enlightened commentariat at iSteve, whose median g is at least one standard deviation above the typical American black male and maybe more, we talk ourselves into all sorts of bullshit simply because we refuse to accept any contrary evidence.

    Way closer to 2 standard deviations. People near the white mean who discuss this kind of stuff are rare.

    Some liberal writes in the NYT that black high school juniors score low on the SAT because the test is racist, and the commenters here cite chapter and verse to refute it until the cows come home. At the same time, we believe that all the polls showing Donald Trump losing the Presidency to be fabrications of the MSM, which to my mind is even stupider.

    I don’t trust pollsters any further than I can throw them. Seems reasonable to me.

    Once HBD becomes more popular, you can rest assured that popular discourse on it will become so detached from reality that it will make today’s PC shibboleths seem like the apex of human rationality.

    Come back from Bizarro World.

  143. @Steve Sailer
    I don't know if I've ever written about the Khazar hypothesis. (I don't even know how to spell Kzahar ...) I'm vaguely interested in it because it was promoted by Arthur Koestler, who was a glamorous figure when I was young. But the genomic studies in the 21st Century have found very little evidence to support it.

    If there is an HBD crowd angle on Jewish ancestral genetics, it's in calling attention to the sizable Italian contribution to Ashkenazi ancestry. I wrote in 2013: "Genetic research on the ancestry of Jewish populations tends to get politicized because of the sneaking suspicion that the average Palestinian may be more closely related to the Hebrews of 70 AD than is, say, Bibi Netanyahu."

    I put up pictures of Netanyahu with Arafat and Netanyahu with Berlusconi:

    http://isteve.blogspot.com/2013/10/nicholas-wade-on-ashkenazi-ancestry.html

    I'd say that Netanyahu looks more like Berlusconi than he looks like Arafat.

    For comparison, here's Netanyahu with his old pal Mitt Romney, who is pretty heavily English:

    http://images.csmonitor.com/csm/2012/09/ROMNEY_FOREIGN_POLICY_23067687.jpg?alias=standard_600x400

    Palestinian Muslims and other Arabs in the region are heavily descended from the Muslim Arabs who came to the Levant in the 600s and onwards. So I don’t see why Netanyahu needs to look like Arafat (not that resemblance of this sort proves anything).

    Why does no one care how genetically close modern Irish or English (no, not recent immigrants) are to the people who lived in those countries 2000 years ago?

    Just about no ethnic group is the same genetically as it was 2000 years ago. But Jews are closer than most.

    • Replies: @Jack D

    Just about no ethnic group is the same genetically as it was 2000 years ago. But Jews are closer than most.
     
    If by 2,000 years you mean the Jews living in Judea during the lifetime of Jesus, then no, you are only half right. But if you mean shortly thereafter - say the Jews living in Italy shortly after the destruction of the Temple (so call it 1900 years) then yes. There was clearly an early European-Middle Eastern mixing event that produced the Jews who are around today and after that they stayed remarkably isolated from the surrounding population for a really long time (remarkable considering for example that American Jews will be largely intermixed in only a couple of generations).
    , @dr kill
    Why I'm so old I remember when Semite referred to every citizen of the Near and Middle East. Semite is not a religious descriptor. It also bothers me when people say Catholic when they mean Roman Catholic. Everyone used to know that all Christians, even Protestants, are Catholic.
  144. @Jack D
    Sharon's mother was of Subbotnik descent. Outside of Israel, the Subbotniks were physically isolated from the rest of Russian (actually Polish) Jews and did not intermarry. The Khazars are middle easternish (Turkic) but the Subbotniks were pure Russian Christian peasants who adopted a fruity religion, except that instead of becoming 7th Day Adventists or Mormons or something, they decided to become Jews. The reason that they were physically isolated is that before the partition of Poland, Russia proper didn't have Jews and even after Jews were only allowed to live in the Pale (the conquered area) unless they had special permission. So there is not a big Subbotnik (or other E. European) component in the Ashkenazi genome even though they lived in E. Europe for many hundreds of years. Intermarriage was rare and usually meant leaving the Jewish community (just like Amish who marry English are usually not Amish anymore).

    In addition to the Khazars, you also had the Karaites, who (like the Samaritans) accept the Hebrew Bible but not the Talmud. For some reason the Nazis didn't persecute Karaites - their beef was with Rabbinic Judaism. So when the Germans showed up, some Hungarian Jews decided that they were really Karaites.

    Hungarian Jewry (until the Germans showed up) was sort of a preview of the track that American Jews are now on, except that the Hungarian Jews were a century or so ahead. The only difference is that in Hungary, assimilation often took the form of formal conversion to Catholicism - most American Jews don't even bother since the elite religion is atheism.

    The statement that Ariel Sharon’s mother was of Subbotnik descent is unproven at best. “Subbotnik ancestry” for Israelis is a kind of urban myth.

    • Replies: @Bee
    These are Sharon's maternal grandparents. I highly doubt they were Subbotniks. For one thing, there are many Ashkenazi Jews named "Shneerov".

    https://www.geni.com/people/Mordehai-Shneirov/6000000011010428064?through=6000000011010679947
    , @Jack D
    Every source I've ever seen says that she was. Do you have any source for this?

    I don't think this is like the US where having a little Cherokee in you is glamorous - if it is in the matrilineal line it may mean that you aren't Jewish at all.
  145. @SPMoore8
    We agree about Russia's general absence of Ashkenazim before the partitions: Where we don't agree is about the nature of Jewish or proto-Jewish sectarians before, in particular, the Subbotniks are not the ones I had in mind.

    See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sect_of_Skhariya_the_Jew

    In particular, the end of the entry; this is part of what I had in mind, which clearly had some Polish-Lithuanian influence. And see also:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judaizers

    Again, at the end of the entry. Here's a little more on the diversity, as well as a signal to Turkic settlements in Lithuania, not just on the hinterlands of that Commonwealth:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crimean_Karaites#Middle_Ages

    I visited Trakai in Lithuania and saw what was left of the Karaite community (not much despite the fact that the Germans did not try to kill them).

    Nothing written in any of these entries contradicts what I said – the Karaites and the Yiddish speaking Ashkenazi Rabbinic Jews hated each other and did not intermix – the narcissism of small difference and all that. Karaites and the other Judaizing sects (aside from their religious and genetic differences and physical differences in location) did not occupy the same ecological niche as Ashkenazi Jews – they continued farming the land and serving as troops for the Lithuanian kings, etc. so they would have been an uneasy fit for the Jews in any case. If they had been another middleman minority (say Chinese) they would have been a better fit and might have eventually merged (lots of Jew-Asian hybrids in the US nowadays) but as it was, it was more like the relationship between American Ashkenazi Jews and uneducated ghetto “Black Jews” like Michelle’s cousin the “rabbi” (without any actual rabbinical training), who adopted a folk Judaism . Jews considered these folks to be ignorant and unlearned (where to be learned was the highest value) and totally unsuitable candidates for marriage. Just because D’Shavious puts on a prayer shawl (upside down because he can’t really read the writing) doesn’t mean you are going to let him marry your daughter.

    When the Subbotniks got to Israel, they were eventually accepted as Jews (the Zionist being non-religious and in need of all the help they could get) but their contribution to the Ashkenazi Jewish genome outside of Israel is nil.

    • Replies: @SPMoore8
    Well, my original point WRT Feldman, Koestler, and Sand was that there might be "some" merit to the Khazar hypothesis since there were "Judaizing" tendencies points east of the Polish Lithuanian Commonwealth since medieval times. Your argument is that there has been no interaction of Ashkenazi rabbinic Judaism with other types of Judaism or proto-Judaism ever.

    Like most things, I think the truth lies somewhere in between, however if the genetics are going to argue that it was minor or non-measurable then that's OK, too. However, the "no contact" idea still has to face the weakening of rabbinic Judaism in the 19th Century as well as the extensive migrations of Ashkenazi Jews from the Pale to the Russian interior, especially in the 20th Century (thus, e.g., Gary Kasparov, and the father of the two Subbotnik adventuresses associated with the San Berdoo massacre who definitely appears to be Ashkenazi in background)

    http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2015/12/22/21/2F8E35B300000578-3369393-image-a-35_1450820374889.jpg

    http://www.bh.org.il/jewish-settlement-siberia/

    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/6d/Jewish_languages_in_the_Russian_Empire_%281897%29.svg/1024px-Jewish_languages_in_the_Russian_Empire_%281897%29.svg.png

    As for Ariel Sharon (not you, your OP): http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4497612,00.html
    , @Kevin Brook
    Jack D wrote: "Ashkenazi Jews [...] If they had been another middleman minority (say Chinese) they would have been a better fit and might have eventually merged (lots of Jew-Asian hybrids in the US nowadays)"

    Actually, this merging also happened once in the distant past. See my article "The Chinese Lady Who Joined the Ashkenazic People" in Jewish Times Asia, March 2015, page 19

    http://issuu.com/jewishtimesasia/docs/mar2015/19

    It turns out the part-Asian Khazars have nothing to do with Ashkenazic ancestry, but we had no reason to believe the East Asian contribution came from Chinese rather than Khazars (some of whom converted to Judaism) before comprehensive genetic data became available. In hindsight I wouldn't have spent two decades researching the Khazar theory of Ashkenazic ancestry had I known what I know now.

    As for Karaites in Eastern Europe, they generally stayed apart from Ashkenazic Jews, as you said, but not always, and there were rare instances of intermarriage between those groups.
  146. @Steve Sailer
    On the other hand, Arafat looks a lot like Ringo Starr, whose ancestry is apparently very conventional for a Liverpudlian:

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/1435135/Family-detective-Ringo-Starr.html

    People really need to stop using this word, “apparently”, about totally factually accurate information that doesn’t agree with their own pre-conceptions.

    BTW, according to this genetic study, “a pre-Islamic expansion Levant was more genetically similar to Europeans than to Middle Easterners”, which fits in with the idea that Mr. Arafat was probably heavily descended from people who came to the Levant in the 600s and onwards.

    http://journals.plos.org/plosgenetics/article?id=10.1371/journal.pgen.1003316

    • Replies: @ben tillman

    People really need to stop using this word, “apparently”, about totally factually accurate information that doesn’t agree with their own pre-conceptions.
     
    If you read the linked article, you'll see that Starkey's farfar was a shadowy figure whose origins are unknown. So it is fair to say "apparently".
    , @Anonymous
    “a pre-Islamic expansion Levant was more genetically similar to Europeans than to Middle Easterners”

    In part, that may be because the pre-Islamic expansion Levantines had less sub-Saharan admixture than modern Middle Easterners.
    , @Anon
    The first ancient dna we've had from the Roman Era (Roman England) that matches a warm, hot, Levantine or Egyptian climate profile for where he has grown up and certainly seem to match Palestinians fairly well (at any rate, better than it does Ashkenazi Jews). That sort of ancestral mix was about before the Muslim Era, in climates like the Levantine which were in the Roman Empire. Whether it was in Israel at the time, we'll have to wait and see (after they imminently sneak a bit more ancient dna from Iron Age Israel past the crazy beard and hat guys over the next year or so). I suspect Muslim era change for the Middle East has been rather overblown and overestimated.
  147. The most deplorable one [AKA "Fourth doorman of the apocalypse"] says:
    @WhatEvvs
    "but the sexists have the fact that men have an entire Y chromosome worth of difference going for them."

    Here is an example of exactly the problem you were talking about: people who don't know a lot about genes, talking about genes.

    It's not only the fact that men have a Y chromosome, but that they lack the two that women have. The fact that women have two X's and men have only one, which they inherit from their mothers, is hugely important.

    In addition to being crudely reductionist on race, most HBD dudes, including Steve, are sad, nasty little butthurt misogynists. And I do mean misogynist in the real old fashioned sense of the word. I have read Sailer for years, and his sensitivity to the fact that women may be superior to men in certain ways is very revealing. I remember one post where a Chinese trainer said that women have superior pain tolerance to men. That may be true, it may not be - pain tolerance is subjective, but my gawd, the hurt feelings.

    It’s not only the fact that men have a Y chromosome, but that they lack the two that women have. The fact that women have two X’s and men have only one, which they inherit from their mothers, is hugely important.

    Can you explain how the fact that women have two X chromosomes and men only have one which they inherit from their mothers is hugely important?

    Are you referring, perhaps,to the process whereby a large number of genes on one X chromosome in every cell in a woman’s body are inactivated? Perhaps you had in mind the averaging effect that that causes.

    Or, perhaps you were alluding to those species of Muntjacs where females have one less chromosome than males do?

  148. @Bee
    The statement that Ariel Sharon's mother was of Subbotnik descent is unproven at best. "Subbotnik ancestry" for Israelis is a kind of urban myth.

    These are Sharon’s maternal grandparents. I highly doubt they were Subbotniks. For one thing, there are many Ashkenazi Jews named “Shneerov”.

    https://www.geni.com/people/Mordehai-Shneirov/6000000011010428064?through=6000000011010679947

  149. @Mike Zwick
    A little off topic but there seems to be a lot of coverage of all of the sexists and racists calling Simone Biles the "Next Michael Phelps." Has anybody even said anything like this? If they did have they ever referred to a white male athlete the same way? It seems like media manufactured angst to shame us all and how racist we all are. Ironically the coverage of her wins in this way takes away from the fact that she is a good athlete who won a buch of medals.

    When I was young I used to be naive enough to think that if something was written, it was worth reading about. But now I know that much of what appears in the media derives from social media in the progression twitter>Facebook>Blog>MSM and I have come to the conclusion that most of it is written by trivial people to draw attention to themselves and to curry the clicks of a specific audience (women or minorities, usually).

    Now that I have alienated at least 2/3rds of humanity I suppose someone could say the same thing about stuff white guys write. Except that I would be perfectly happy to read an analysis of HBD, the economy, immigration, or many other interesting and intellectually challenging topics except that women and minorities rarely write about such things. Now why is that?

  150. @yowza
    Steve, he's not saying you're wrong. He's saying the implications are terrifying to him.

    There is no shortage of misguided policy proposals that harp on the pet obsessions of the HBD community. However, at least in the blogs and forums I examined, there was little discussion of what to do with the data of “human biodiversity.”
     
    If you remember, quite a while back, there was a writer for, I believe SLATE (or Salon?), who had read about biodiversity, and concluded that, scientifically, it had to be true.

    His first question about his newfound discovery was "what do we DO with it?"

    Shortly afterwards, he was converged upon by not only the Slate readership, but also his editors, and the people who sign his checks. He recanted and apologized.

    In debates I've had with others personally on the issue, those who give me some consideration have inevitably stared at me with nervous eyes and said "okay, if you're right, what DO we do with this information?"

    If I recall, your response was using it for better social policy for the improvement of the lives of everyone, which... just isn't enough for them. They need more assurance that it doesn't end in concentration camps, enslavement of the lessers, or it's a non-starter, science be damned.

    Until a better view of the social outcome of HBD being widely accepted is clear and believable to them, they ain't gonna play. They'll play AROUND it, like Ari just did. He'll give you a little bird whistle, but until you convince him of roses on the other side, he ain't playin'.

    They need more assurance that it doesn’t end in concentration camps, enslavement of the lessers, or it’s a non-starter, science be damned.

    That’s crediting them with the best possible motives. Maybe they just don’t want to see everything on which they’ve based they’re worldview, everything that makes them the good guys and their opponents the bad guys, proved wrong.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    History is full of examples of cases where the dominant group doesn't want to throw in the towel on their beliefs, long after science has shown them to be completely wrong. This is especially true where these beliefs are central to their self-image and (especially) where their livelihood depends on these false beliefs remaining valid.

    Now this doesn't mean that HBD is automatically right, but even if it is 100% correct, the mainstream consensus is not going to change overnight just because it is. In fact quite the opposite - they are going to fight it tooth and nail. Usually the greatest orthodoxy is imposed when your belief system is threatened - you fear that if you let the camel's nose in the tent even a little, the whole camel may follow. So you will see more and more absurd pronouncements - race does not exist AT ALL, not even a little. All humans are totally 100% the same. Etc.
  151. @Clathrus
    We need a new political ideology that accepts HBD and makes kind and prudent decisions with genetics in mind.

    Personally I'm moving towards favouring a sort of global re-engineering using CRISPR so as to produce a clean break from all existing ethnic identities. Look at chickens. No-one really cares about the differences between various subspecies of wild junglefowl now that we have the domestic chicken. That should be the goal for humanity. A new, genetically heterogeneous & incredibly smart population more concerned with P versus NP than I versus P.

    The only problem is that you’ve got to break a whole lot of eggs to make that omelet. For one thing, if you were going to create this new future superhuman race (you-know-who gave racial breeding experiments a bad name anyway) it would probably not include a lot of African genes or brown genes in general. You would end up with some kind of white-Ashkenazi-E. Asian hapa hybrid (much like the new class of America’s elite – Trump’s grandchildren and Hillary’s, etc.) and what would happen to the other several billion people whose genes were substandard? The group that you describe will in fact be our future overlords (and I for one welcome them!) but they are not going to be the bulk of humanity.

    For much of history and in many places, the ruling class and the masses were genetically distinct – the Manchus ruled China, Russian royalty was more British and German than Russian, a few hundred white planters ruled over the black slave masses of the Caribbean, etc. I think that is where we are headed again. Because of the necessities of maintaining a democratic front, you have to toss the masses enough of a bone to keep yourself in power, but in the end the elites get most of the goodies.

    • Replies: @Clathrus
    it would probably not include a lot of African genes or brown genes in general. You would end up with some kind of white-Ashkenazi-E. Asian hapa hybrid

    As far as superficial appearance goes, why restrict humanity to preexisting genetic variation? All kinds of novel changes could be made.
    It should be possible to give the new humans a distinctive look unlike any existing people. Give them a new physiognomy with pink hair and green skin or something. No ethnic group need feel discriminated against because we'd be replacing ourselves in entirety.

    Another nice alternative is to deliberately make the new humans look like sub-Saharan Africans. I imagine that many here would object to that, but I wouldn't mind at all. I have no use for atavistic ethnocentrism. It really is what's on the inside that counts. The one way in which they probably have to differ from any existing group is in cranial capacity. I'm guessing they will be born by Cesarean section.
  152. @WhatEvvs
    "but the sexists have the fact that men have an entire Y chromosome worth of difference going for them."

    Here is an example of exactly the problem you were talking about: people who don't know a lot about genes, talking about genes.

    It's not only the fact that men have a Y chromosome, but that they lack the two that women have. The fact that women have two X's and men have only one, which they inherit from their mothers, is hugely important.

    In addition to being crudely reductionist on race, most HBD dudes, including Steve, are sad, nasty little butthurt misogynists. And I do mean misogynist in the real old fashioned sense of the word. I have read Sailer for years, and his sensitivity to the fact that women may be superior to men in certain ways is very revealing. I remember one post where a Chinese trainer said that women have superior pain tolerance to men. That may be true, it may not be - pain tolerance is subjective, but my gawd, the hurt feelings.

    X and Y chromosomes (especially Y) both carry very few important genes, for obvious reasons – if say the gene for coding hemoglobin was on the Y gene and women lacked it, they would die and not be capable of reproduction. Or if it was on the X and women had two copies, they would make too much hemoglobin and die because of that. So very little of major physical importance (aside from things that code for the reproductive system and secondary sexual characteristics) is left on those chromosomes. Of course there are still lots of subtle differences in strength, temperament, etc. but the basics are the same even to the point that men have nipples.

    • Replies: @The most deplorable one

    X and Y chromosomes (especially Y) both carry very few important genes
     
    That is simply not true. The part about the X chromosome, that is. The X carries something around 1,000 genes and is enriched in genes that have an impact on the brain, it seems.

    1,000 is two orders of magnitude larger than few, and possibly as much as three orders of magnitude larger than very few.
    , @gcochran
    Lots of important genes are on the X: key word = "dosage compensation"
    , @415 reasons
    FOXP3 and the common gamma chain (IL2RG) are pretty important genes on the X chromosome. In pre-hospital evolutionary times you die of massive autoimmunity or severe combined immunodeficiency without working copies of them.
    , @Bert
    Where are all these very important genes hiding?
  153. The most deplorable one [AKA "Fourth doorman of the apocalypse"] says:
    @Jack D
    X and Y chromosomes (especially Y) both carry very few important genes, for obvious reasons - if say the gene for coding hemoglobin was on the Y gene and women lacked it, they would die and not be capable of reproduction. Or if it was on the X and women had two copies, they would make too much hemoglobin and die because of that. So very little of major physical importance (aside from things that code for the reproductive system and secondary sexual characteristics) is left on those chromosomes. Of course there are still lots of subtle differences in strength, temperament, etc. but the basics are the same even to the point that men have nipples.

    X and Y chromosomes (especially Y) both carry very few important genes

    That is simply not true. The part about the X chromosome, that is. The X carries something around 1,000 genes and is enriched in genes that have an impact on the brain, it seems.

    1,000 is two orders of magnitude larger than few, and possibly as much as three orders of magnitude larger than very few.

  154. @Jean Cocteausten
    If you include the commenters, both iSteve and Taki's are racist sites, but you can't blame Steve and Taki for what their nuttiest commenters post.

    I miss ThorDaddy, dude.

  155. @Harry Baldwin
    They need more assurance that it doesn’t end in concentration camps, enslavement of the lessers, or it’s a non-starter, science be damned.

    That's crediting them with the best possible motives. Maybe they just don't want to see everything on which they've based they're worldview, everything that makes them the good guys and their opponents the bad guys, proved wrong.

    History is full of examples of cases where the dominant group doesn’t want to throw in the towel on their beliefs, long after science has shown them to be completely wrong. This is especially true where these beliefs are central to their self-image and (especially) where their livelihood depends on these false beliefs remaining valid.

    Now this doesn’t mean that HBD is automatically right, but even if it is 100% correct, the mainstream consensus is not going to change overnight just because it is. In fact quite the opposite – they are going to fight it tooth and nail. Usually the greatest orthodoxy is imposed when your belief system is threatened – you fear that if you let the camel’s nose in the tent even a little, the whole camel may follow. So you will see more and more absurd pronouncements – race does not exist AT ALL, not even a little. All humans are totally 100% the same. Etc.

    • Agree: Harry Baldwin
  156. @Jack D
    I visited Trakai in Lithuania and saw what was left of the Karaite community (not much despite the fact that the Germans did not try to kill them).

    Nothing written in any of these entries contradicts what I said - the Karaites and the Yiddish speaking Ashkenazi Rabbinic Jews hated each other and did not intermix - the narcissism of small difference and all that. Karaites and the other Judaizing sects (aside from their religious and genetic differences and physical differences in location) did not occupy the same ecological niche as Ashkenazi Jews - they continued farming the land and serving as troops for the Lithuanian kings, etc. so they would have been an uneasy fit for the Jews in any case. If they had been another middleman minority (say Chinese) they would have been a better fit and might have eventually merged (lots of Jew-Asian hybrids in the US nowadays) but as it was, it was more like the relationship between American Ashkenazi Jews and uneducated ghetto "Black Jews" like Michelle's cousin the "rabbi" (without any actual rabbinical training), who adopted a folk Judaism . Jews considered these folks to be ignorant and unlearned (where to be learned was the highest value) and totally unsuitable candidates for marriage. Just because D'Shavious puts on a prayer shawl (upside down because he can't really read the writing) doesn't mean you are going to let him marry your daughter.

    When the Subbotniks got to Israel, they were eventually accepted as Jews (the Zionist being non-religious and in need of all the help they could get) but their contribution to the Ashkenazi Jewish genome outside of Israel is nil.

    Well, my original point WRT Feldman, Koestler, and Sand was that there might be “some” merit to the Khazar hypothesis since there were “Judaizing” tendencies points east of the Polish Lithuanian Commonwealth since medieval times. Your argument is that there has been no interaction of Ashkenazi rabbinic Judaism with other types of Judaism or proto-Judaism ever.

    Like most things, I think the truth lies somewhere in between, however if the genetics are going to argue that it was minor or non-measurable then that’s OK, too. However, the “no contact” idea still has to face the weakening of rabbinic Judaism in the 19th Century as well as the extensive migrations of Ashkenazi Jews from the Pale to the Russian interior, especially in the 20th Century (thus, e.g., Gary Kasparov, and the father of the two Subbotnik adventuresses associated with the San Berdoo massacre who definitely appears to be Ashkenazi in background)

    http://www.bh.org.il/jewish-settlement-siberia/

    As for Ariel Sharon (not you, your OP): http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4497612,00.html

    • Replies: @Jack D
    I know someone (Jewish) whose last name is Tobolsky (indicating an origin in Tobolsk). I don't dispute that (some) Jews eventually lived outside the Pale but living and intermixing are two different things. It's (apparently) difficult for current generation Americans to conceive (no pun intended) that two groups can live side by side in the same place and not have sex with each other, but in E. Europe (and even in the US up to the end of WWII) it was quite common for various ethnic communities (and not just Jews) not to interbreed and to remain genetically distinct for hundreds of years. Gypsies married gypsies , Jews married Jews, etc. Intermixing was just unthinkable in that old fashioned horrible racist way.
    , @Clyde
    I read your last link about the Subbotniks and the Ariel Sharon connection. I know a very pale Israeli and will ask him if he has some part Subbotnik.
  157. @Bee
    Palestinian Muslims and other Arabs in the region are heavily descended from the Muslim Arabs who came to the Levant in the 600s and onwards. So I don't see why Netanyahu needs to look like Arafat (not that resemblance of this sort proves anything).

    Why does no one care how genetically close modern Irish or English (no, not recent immigrants) are to the people who lived in those countries 2000 years ago?

    Just about no ethnic group is the same genetically as it was 2000 years ago. But Jews are closer than most.

    Just about no ethnic group is the same genetically as it was 2000 years ago. But Jews are closer than most.

    If by 2,000 years you mean the Jews living in Judea during the lifetime of Jesus, then no, you are only half right. But if you mean shortly thereafter – say the Jews living in Italy shortly after the destruction of the Temple (so call it 1900 years) then yes. There was clearly an early European-Middle Eastern mixing event that produced the Jews who are around today and after that they stayed remarkably isolated from the surrounding population for a really long time (remarkable considering for example that American Jews will be largely intermixed in only a couple of generations).

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Ashkenazi Jews have a small Northern European ancestral component, which the author's of this recent paper favor to be of Eastern European origin. Greg Cochran has also written about this paper at his blog.
  158. @Anonymous
    Well that's because it's personal with you. You were part of that MR crowd that had that feud with Razib and GNXP about a decade ago. I'm not a big Razib fan myself but he's quite sharp and erudite.

    When it comes to scientific matters in a more general sense as well as the fields of modern biodiversity, genes, etc. Razib Khan is a true scholarly treasure and a welcomed voice.

    However, when it comes to other matters (e.g. history; philosphy; religion in general) it is unfortunate that his personal biases show and amply demonstrate that he lacks even the most basic competence to ever rise above a Monday Morning second guesser. As he is not a trained/post-doctorate historian, theologian, or philosopher, obviously his opinions are simply that–namely opinions and really shouldn’t be taken seriously at all by clear thinking rational people when he expounds upon non-scientific matters.

    Of course, for such people as Mr. Khan, the fields of mathematics and scientific matters are of the highest order (with little to next to nothing coming close in relevance) he can rest in the knowledge that his areas of expertise are on the ascendancy in the twenty-first century.

  159. That’s not what “epigenetics” means. But what would I know, I’m just a pseudoscientific racist with a biology PhD reading the expert opinion of a biologist with a B.A. in journalism.

  160. @Jack D
    X and Y chromosomes (especially Y) both carry very few important genes, for obvious reasons - if say the gene for coding hemoglobin was on the Y gene and women lacked it, they would die and not be capable of reproduction. Or if it was on the X and women had two copies, they would make too much hemoglobin and die because of that. So very little of major physical importance (aside from things that code for the reproductive system and secondary sexual characteristics) is left on those chromosomes. Of course there are still lots of subtle differences in strength, temperament, etc. but the basics are the same even to the point that men have nipples.

    Lots of important genes are on the X: key word = “dosage compensation”

    • Agree: 415 reasons
    • Replies: @The most deplorable one
    It strikes me that genes than cannot play well in a body when their dosage is increased beyond relatively narrow limits would migrate to the non-pseudo-autosomal part of the X chromosome.
  161. @Jack D
    The only problem is that you've got to break a whole lot of eggs to make that omelet. For one thing, if you were going to create this new future superhuman race (you-know-who gave racial breeding experiments a bad name anyway) it would probably not include a lot of African genes or brown genes in general. You would end up with some kind of white-Ashkenazi-E. Asian hapa hybrid (much like the new class of America's elite - Trump's grandchildren and Hillary's, etc.) and what would happen to the other several billion people whose genes were substandard? The group that you describe will in fact be our future overlords (and I for one welcome them!) but they are not going to be the bulk of humanity.

    For much of history and in many places, the ruling class and the masses were genetically distinct - the Manchus ruled China, Russian royalty was more British and German than Russian, a few hundred white planters ruled over the black slave masses of the Caribbean, etc. I think that is where we are headed again. Because of the necessities of maintaining a democratic front, you have to toss the masses enough of a bone to keep yourself in power, but in the end the elites get most of the goodies.

    it would probably not include a lot of African genes or brown genes in general. You would end up with some kind of white-Ashkenazi-E. Asian hapa hybrid

    As far as superficial appearance goes, why restrict humanity to preexisting genetic variation? All kinds of novel changes could be made.
    It should be possible to give the new humans a distinctive look unlike any existing people. Give them a new physiognomy with pink hair and green skin or something. No ethnic group need feel discriminated against because we’d be replacing ourselves in entirety.

    Another nice alternative is to deliberately make the new humans look like sub-Saharan Africans. I imagine that many here would object to that, but I wouldn’t mind at all. I have no use for atavistic ethnocentrism. It really is what’s on the inside that counts. The one way in which they probably have to differ from any existing group is in cranial capacity. I’m guessing they will be born by Cesarean section.

    • Replies: @Anon
    Another nice alternative is to deliberately make the new humans look like sub-Saharan Africans. I imagine that many here would object to that, but I wouldn’t mind at all.

    Yeah, most of variants for Black or White appearance are just going to be a few hundred or thousands. Most of the skin colour's understood, hair structure and the facial shape is getting there. If CRISPR / CAS-9 tech gets good enough might end up being perfectly possible to tweak things so you've got parents doing an Angelina and having an interracial family who are all their own genetic offspring (and also phenotypes beyond what we know). I'd be pretty fine with that tbh, screw the people in the hbdsphere with no interest in the science beyond ranting on about the ineffable profound beauty of White women / men and what have you. If you can go for Brazilian diversity in appearance without Brazilian IQs, that's probably fine. Seems like a better world than one where everyone looks Chinese / White.
  162. The Forward: “Human Biodiversity: The Pseudoscientific Racism of the Alt-Right”

    My first impression is – Don’t you have to be a scientist to recognize the difference between science and pseudoscience? But that isn’t valid. First of all, Ari Feldman might be a scientist. More importantly, I’m not a journalist, but I can sure tell the difference between journalism and pseudojournalism (like this Forward piece.)

    The people who hate the word “race” might consider focusing their rage against institutions more influential than HBD bloggers. For example, the federal government spends billions to collect and make available Census data sorted by race; the New York Times uses the word “race” dozens of times per week; and the President of the United States entitled his autobiography Dreams from My Father: A Story of Race and Inheritance.

    Good point, Steve, but don’t think it won’t happen. It’s an intriguing mental exercise to look around and try to guess which moderate and even progressive people or entities of today will be considered the racists of tomorrow. Who would’ve thought at the time that Clinton’s crime bill of the 90’s would now be considered (by a significant portion of progressive society) to be merely a powerful white man’s scheme to put black men in jail ?

    Oh, and by the way, here’s another government entity that usually asks about an individual’s race before any other topic – 911 dispatchers.

  163. @Bee
    The statement that Ariel Sharon's mother was of Subbotnik descent is unproven at best. "Subbotnik ancestry" for Israelis is a kind of urban myth.

    Every source I’ve ever seen says that she was. Do you have any source for this?

    I don’t think this is like the US where having a little Cherokee in you is glamorous – if it is in the matrilineal line it may mean that you aren’t Jewish at all.

    • Replies: @SPMoore8
    Like I said before, I think most Americans who mention NA ancestry are, like Elizabeth Warren, people with upper middle class pretensions who want to mention this ancestry because it confers a certain cachet, and while the biological basis may be slim to none there probably is some level of cultural association (as with many Americans with Southern, Frontier, or French Canadian heritages). In my case, the cultural definitely outweighs any potential genetics, so I am not going to spend the money to find out either way. But maybe my sister will .... if she is my sister. LOL.

    On the other hand when the discussion turns to "who's a Jew" there seems to be an interest involved here, one that as a non-Jew I have a problem relating to. There appears to be two ideological elements; one, the matrilineal "purity" of Jewish descent, and two, being at least 50% Near Eastern Semitic to justify the Zionist project. Those are powerful incentives to view the data in particular ways. I don't think I have any interest either way, but then again my children have some Hungarian and Jewish background on their mother's side, so, there's that.
    , @Bee
    What "sources" are these?

    The claim for Sharon's Subbotnik ancestry seems to have popped up on the internet in the 2010s, and then was reprinted in a couple of newspapers, yes, largely in "Lists of famous Subbotniks" and the like.

    I don't think any full-length bio of Sharon says so, nor do I think Sharon ever said so himself. So where is this coming from?
  164. The most deplorable one [AKA "Fourth doorman of the apocalypse"] says:
    @gcochran
    Lots of important genes are on the X: key word = "dosage compensation"

    It strikes me that genes than cannot play well in a body when their dosage is increased beyond relatively narrow limits would migrate to the non-pseudo-autosomal part of the X chromosome.

  165. @Jason Liu
    Standard semantic obfuscation revolving around the word "race", which isn't a scientific classification in the first place. That's what allows dumbshits to derail with "race is a social construct" when the topic is actually phenotypes.

    Yea that was basically a thousand words of gibberish. No one in the HBD sphere denies an interaction of genes and life experiences/environment. There is a false dichotomy between acknowledging that outcomes aren’t 100% genetic and acknowledging that a lot of the structure in data about outcomes of different groups in American society is due to genetic differences between different groups of people.

    And as far as policy prescriptions? They’re not very grand and they require no new government agencies: acknowledge that those differences in outcomes are basically impossible to change and quit obsessing about the victimization Olympics. There will never be “progress” towards ending “the gap” other than becoming Brazil.

  166. @Jack D
    X and Y chromosomes (especially Y) both carry very few important genes, for obvious reasons - if say the gene for coding hemoglobin was on the Y gene and women lacked it, they would die and not be capable of reproduction. Or if it was on the X and women had two copies, they would make too much hemoglobin and die because of that. So very little of major physical importance (aside from things that code for the reproductive system and secondary sexual characteristics) is left on those chromosomes. Of course there are still lots of subtle differences in strength, temperament, etc. but the basics are the same even to the point that men have nipples.

    FOXP3 and the common gamma chain (IL2RG) are pretty important genes on the X chromosome. In pre-hospital evolutionary times you die of massive autoimmunity or severe combined immunodeficiency without working copies of them.

  167. @SPMoore8
    Well, my original point WRT Feldman, Koestler, and Sand was that there might be "some" merit to the Khazar hypothesis since there were "Judaizing" tendencies points east of the Polish Lithuanian Commonwealth since medieval times. Your argument is that there has been no interaction of Ashkenazi rabbinic Judaism with other types of Judaism or proto-Judaism ever.

    Like most things, I think the truth lies somewhere in between, however if the genetics are going to argue that it was minor or non-measurable then that's OK, too. However, the "no contact" idea still has to face the weakening of rabbinic Judaism in the 19th Century as well as the extensive migrations of Ashkenazi Jews from the Pale to the Russian interior, especially in the 20th Century (thus, e.g., Gary Kasparov, and the father of the two Subbotnik adventuresses associated with the San Berdoo massacre who definitely appears to be Ashkenazi in background)

    http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2015/12/22/21/2F8E35B300000578-3369393-image-a-35_1450820374889.jpg

    http://www.bh.org.il/jewish-settlement-siberia/

    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/6d/Jewish_languages_in_the_Russian_Empire_%281897%29.svg/1024px-Jewish_languages_in_the_Russian_Empire_%281897%29.svg.png

    As for Ariel Sharon (not you, your OP): http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4497612,00.html

    I know someone (Jewish) whose last name is Tobolsky (indicating an origin in Tobolsk). I don’t dispute that (some) Jews eventually lived outside the Pale but living and intermixing are two different things. It’s (apparently) difficult for current generation Americans to conceive (no pun intended) that two groups can live side by side in the same place and not have sex with each other, but in E. Europe (and even in the US up to the end of WWII) it was quite common for various ethnic communities (and not just Jews) not to interbreed and to remain genetically distinct for hundreds of years. Gypsies married gypsies , Jews married Jews, etc. Intermixing was just unthinkable in that old fashioned horrible racist way.

  168. @Mike Zwick
    " the elite religion is atheism." The elite religion is Pious Puritanical Political Correctness. We are all expected to seek absolution for our original sin of racism/sexism/homophobia/islamophobia.

    ” the elite religion is atheism.” The elite religion is Pious Puritanical Political Correctness. We are all expected to seek absolution for our original sin of racism/sexism/homophobia/islamophobia.

    There’s nothing Puritanical about it.

  169. @Steve Richter

    Would you say that the difference in height between men and women cannot be genetic? After all, there is such a wide (and overlapping) range.
     
    Selecting for intelligence seems different that for other traits. Humans are the only animals that have increased their intelligence over evolutionary time. ( assuming that current day humans are smarter than the ones who migrated from Africa. ) Just thinking that before we accept that HBD has produced an increase in intelligence there has to be an explanation for why no other species has evolved greater intelligence

    Selecting for intelligence seems different that for other traits. Humans are the only animals that have increased their intelligence over evolutionary time.

    Think about what you just said.

  170. @Jack D
    Every source I've ever seen says that she was. Do you have any source for this?

    I don't think this is like the US where having a little Cherokee in you is glamorous - if it is in the matrilineal line it may mean that you aren't Jewish at all.

    Like I said before, I think most Americans who mention NA ancestry are, like Elizabeth Warren, people with upper middle class pretensions who want to mention this ancestry because it confers a certain cachet, and while the biological basis may be slim to none there probably is some level of cultural association (as with many Americans with Southern, Frontier, or French Canadian heritages). In my case, the cultural definitely outweighs any potential genetics, so I am not going to spend the money to find out either way. But maybe my sister will …. if she is my sister. LOL.

    On the other hand when the discussion turns to “who’s a Jew” there seems to be an interest involved here, one that as a non-Jew I have a problem relating to. There appears to be two ideological elements; one, the matrilineal “purity” of Jewish descent, and two, being at least 50% Near Eastern Semitic to justify the Zionist project. Those are powerful incentives to view the data in particular ways. I don’t think I have any interest either way, but then again my children have some Hungarian and Jewish background on their mother’s side, so, there’s that.

    • Replies: @utu
    "Those are powerful incentives to view the data in particular ways." - Not only view but to manufacture data.
  171. @WhatEvvs
    "but the sexists have the fact that men have an entire Y chromosome worth of difference going for them."

    Here is an example of exactly the problem you were talking about: people who don't know a lot about genes, talking about genes.

    It's not only the fact that men have a Y chromosome, but that they lack the two that women have. The fact that women have two X's and men have only one, which they inherit from their mothers, is hugely important.

    In addition to being crudely reductionist on race, most HBD dudes, including Steve, are sad, nasty little butthurt misogynists. And I do mean misogynist in the real old fashioned sense of the word. I have read Sailer for years, and his sensitivity to the fact that women may be superior to men in certain ways is very revealing. I remember one post where a Chinese trainer said that women have superior pain tolerance to men. That may be true, it may not be - pain tolerance is subjective, but my gawd, the hurt feelings.

    In addition to being crudely reductionist on race, most HBD dudes, including Steve, are sad, nasty little butthurt misogynists.

    You’re delusional, which isn’t at all uncommon for people who use the term “reductionist”.

  172. @Bee
    People really need to stop using this word, "apparently", about totally factually accurate information that doesn't agree with their own pre-conceptions.

    BTW, according to this genetic study, "a pre-Islamic expansion Levant was more genetically similar to Europeans than to Middle Easterners", which fits in with the idea that Mr. Arafat was probably heavily descended from people who came to the Levant in the 600s and onwards.

    http://journals.plos.org/plosgenetics/article?id=10.1371/journal.pgen.1003316

    People really need to stop using this word, “apparently”, about totally factually accurate information that doesn’t agree with their own pre-conceptions.

    If you read the linked article, you’ll see that Starkey’s farfar was a shadowy figure whose origins are unknown. So it is fair to say “apparently”.

  173. @yowza
    Steve, he's not saying you're wrong. He's saying the implications are terrifying to him.

    There is no shortage of misguided policy proposals that harp on the pet obsessions of the HBD community. However, at least in the blogs and forums I examined, there was little discussion of what to do with the data of “human biodiversity.”
     
    If you remember, quite a while back, there was a writer for, I believe SLATE (or Salon?), who had read about biodiversity, and concluded that, scientifically, it had to be true.

    His first question about his newfound discovery was "what do we DO with it?"

    Shortly afterwards, he was converged upon by not only the Slate readership, but also his editors, and the people who sign his checks. He recanted and apologized.

    In debates I've had with others personally on the issue, those who give me some consideration have inevitably stared at me with nervous eyes and said "okay, if you're right, what DO we do with this information?"

    If I recall, your response was using it for better social policy for the improvement of the lives of everyone, which... just isn't enough for them. They need more assurance that it doesn't end in concentration camps, enslavement of the lessers, or it's a non-starter, science be damned.

    Until a better view of the social outcome of HBD being widely accepted is clear and believable to them, they ain't gonna play. They'll play AROUND it, like Ari just did. He'll give you a little bird whistle, but until you convince him of roses on the other side, he ain't playin'.

    They need more assurance that it doesn’t end in concentration camps, enslavement of the lessers, or it’s a non-starter, science be damned.

    Isn’t it funny then that they don’t need assurances that the prevailing ideology won’t end in concentration camps, enslavement of the betters, etc.?

  174. @iffen
    One can only imagine what happens when 90 IQ dummies in Appalachia start getting into these ideas

    One can understand why the article mentions commenters like you.

    One can understand why the article mentions commenters like you.

    Indeed. One wonders what his opinion is about BLM and the Obama administration fomenting hate among 85 IQ blacks everywhere. For some reason riling up 90 IQ whites is dangerous, but riling up blacks is not. It’s not like blacks statistically tend to even greater violence than their low IQs would predict, or anything.

  175. anon • Disclaimer says:
    @Steve Richter

    It doesn’t need to. That’s natural variance that nobody of any ideological background denies.
     
    just seems that in a hunter gather society people are going to mate within the group without much regard to intelligence. Strength, courage, deviousness, manual dexterity, disease resistance, being sexy, all sorts of traits will be decisive in who mates with who. And yet hunter gather groups like Africans do show wide ranges of IQ. Just as wide a range as Whites and Asians.

    just seems that in a hunter gather society people are going to mate within the group without much regard to intelligence.

    Yeah. Exactly.

    And yet hunter gather groups like Africans do show wide ranges of IQ.

    I’m not sure that that’s actually true, but if it is, that’s exactly the point. If intelligence has no effect on your ability to pass on your genes, then you’re going to get a range that’s all over the place.

    Let’s say there was a gene for “being really good at card games”.

    If women didn’t care about card games, then men with the gene and without the gene would be equally likely to pass it on. So you’d have a whole wide range of people on that area.

    If, for some reason, women suddenly did start caring about card games, then you’d start to see people with the gene for being good at card games passing their genes on more.

    Intelligence is sort of like that. If you were a hunter-gatherer, in an environment where there was plenty to hunt and gather, intelligence wouldn’t really be relevant.

    But if you were living in an environment where intelligence made you more successful, you’d start to see selection for intelligence.

    This is the basis for the book The 10,000 Year Explosion. You should read it.

  176. @International Jew
    Group solidarity. If you had a below-average child would you push him out to sea on an ice floe?

    This . Is. Sparta!

    Although IIRC they eventually ran out of actual Spartans due to this pickiness.

  177. @Broski
    HBD doesn't explain intragroup IQ range. Basic, basic, 101 level standard trait distributions do. Hence, the title "The Bell Curve."

    And there isn't a gap intragroup, there is a spectrum. There will be a gap between two people, but people in the group filling the spectrum.

    Once there is such a wide gap will not the smart ones break off into their own group or be the ones who survive a famine?

     

    The real thrust of Charles Murray's work is assortative mating by IQ, which has only become ubiquitous during the meritocratic professional era of the past 50 or so years. You may find his discussions of that instructive.

    In brief answer to your question, they won't break off, but they'll screw the dumbs by facilitating things like, oh, globalization to send away the dumbs' jobs or bring in other, cheaper dumbs to mow their lawns, while they and their spouses go off to their doctor/lawyer/professor/business exec jobs.

    ” ..while they and their spouses go off to their doctor/lawyer/professor/business exec jobs” and join their priceless spergy intellectual talents (the only kind which get rewarded nowadays) together to have a couple of autistic spectrum kids. For which they’ll place the blame on vaccination, or some such UMC boogeyman.
    Unsupervised assortative mating of the clerical&professional classes, in the the last century and the beginning of this, is underdiscussed IMO.

  178. @Jim Don Bob
    Damn! I must have missed the part about "the inadequacies of gay men and lesbians". I'm gonna have to go search the archives.

    Our host should really have a tag for that.

  179. @Anonymous
    Well that's because it's personal with you. You were part of that MR crowd that had that feud with Razib and GNXP about a decade ago. I'm not a big Razib fan myself but he's quite sharp and erudite.

    Anonymous, I get the Khans confused, the left has the constitution waving, Trumps hating Khan and he is good, Steve’s Khan, Razib is bad. Posters here point out obvious difference that most intelligent and honest people would observe. My favorite liberal conservationist icon from the recent past is Jacques Cousteau who said the world would be a better place if 350,000 people die per day. He never really said which people, but I don’t think he meant anyone in his circle of intellectual elitists.

  180. @Anonymous
    Its not real difficult for intelligent open-minded adults to grasp just exactly how ignoring the reality of HBD has negatively impacted the US for the past 50 years.

    Please give some examples.

    Education

    Criminal justice

    Black/white relations

    And if you can’t fill out the details yourself, I will have to classify you as either a troll or too unintelligent to bother wasting my time to fill you in.

  181. anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    “…but they’ll screw the dumbs by facilitating things like, oh, globalization to send away the dumbs’ jobs or bring in other, cheaper dumbs to mow their lawns, while they and their spouses go off to their doctor/lawyer/professor/business exec jobs.”

    This fine strategy will only work until some member or segment of the elite gets peeved enough over something to amp “his” segment of the dumbs to intimidate other elites (aka big demonstrations of unruly mobs). Then others respond by mobilizing their dumbs. Then you’ll have a place, like some places in India, where elites compete by having their mobs fight the other’s mobs with iron bars. If elite conflict gets extreme enough, someone arms their mob with real weapons. Taken to the end, you end up with Aleppo. Such a fine future.

  182. A more recent piece by Razib Khan on Ashkenazi Jews (no Khazo!):

    http://www.unz.com/gnxp/the-origins-of-ashkenazi-jews-near-resolution/

  183. In other HBD news, on this day 495 years ago, Tenochtitlan (Mexico City) fell to Cortez and a few hundred Spaniards and their anti-Aztec allies.

  184. @Boethiuss
    "The altright was attractive to me primarily because it had less groupthink and bias than the mainstream, but as our popularity grows that no longer seems to be the case."

    Yeah that's part of it but I think a bigger issue is relating to the mainstream. We know the mainstream has a warped view of the altright, but to some extent it goes the other direction as well.

    Altrighters (at least the ones here) delude themselves into thinking that because they have a knowledge edge relative to the mainstream pertaining to something, they have a knowledge edge over everything, and therefore can safely ignore anything inconvenient.

    “Altrighters (at least the ones here) delude themselves into thinking that because they have a knowledge edge relative to the mainstream pertaining to something, they have a knowledge edge over everything, and therefore can safely ignore anything inconvenient.”

    Or they are smarter than average and think they have a knowledge edge over other things because………….they do.

  185. @WhatEvvs
    "but the sexists have the fact that men have an entire Y chromosome worth of difference going for them."

    Here is an example of exactly the problem you were talking about: people who don't know a lot about genes, talking about genes.

    It's not only the fact that men have a Y chromosome, but that they lack the two that women have. The fact that women have two X's and men have only one, which they inherit from their mothers, is hugely important.

    In addition to being crudely reductionist on race, most HBD dudes, including Steve, are sad, nasty little butthurt misogynists. And I do mean misogynist in the real old fashioned sense of the word. I have read Sailer for years, and his sensitivity to the fact that women may be superior to men in certain ways is very revealing. I remember one post where a Chinese trainer said that women have superior pain tolerance to men. That may be true, it may not be - pain tolerance is subjective, but my gawd, the hurt feelings.

    “Chinese trainer” talk out of arse. I suspect that’s why people were annoyed.
    Jury’s out on that one, because as you wisely note, it’s subjective, i.e. the weaselly bastards all lie about it.
    Here’s a grab-bag of contradictory opinions, for starters. It seems to change with the time of month, among other things!
    https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/09/140910083339.htm
    http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/story?id=97662&page=1
    http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/women-feel-pain-more-intensely/

    I recall a similar “debate” about pain and anaesthetic tolerances among mutant MC1R sufferers, or “gingers”, as we are known. One lot of boffins swore blind we needed more dope to put us under but otherwise tough enough, others that we were pansies, etc. etc.

  186. @SPMoore8
    Well, my original point WRT Feldman, Koestler, and Sand was that there might be "some" merit to the Khazar hypothesis since there were "Judaizing" tendencies points east of the Polish Lithuanian Commonwealth since medieval times. Your argument is that there has been no interaction of Ashkenazi rabbinic Judaism with other types of Judaism or proto-Judaism ever.

    Like most things, I think the truth lies somewhere in between, however if the genetics are going to argue that it was minor or non-measurable then that's OK, too. However, the "no contact" idea still has to face the weakening of rabbinic Judaism in the 19th Century as well as the extensive migrations of Ashkenazi Jews from the Pale to the Russian interior, especially in the 20th Century (thus, e.g., Gary Kasparov, and the father of the two Subbotnik adventuresses associated with the San Berdoo massacre who definitely appears to be Ashkenazi in background)

    http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2015/12/22/21/2F8E35B300000578-3369393-image-a-35_1450820374889.jpg

    http://www.bh.org.il/jewish-settlement-siberia/

    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/6d/Jewish_languages_in_the_Russian_Empire_%281897%29.svg/1024px-Jewish_languages_in_the_Russian_Empire_%281897%29.svg.png

    As for Ariel Sharon (not you, your OP): http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4497612,00.html

    I read your last link about the Subbotniks and the Ariel Sharon connection. I know a very pale Israeli and will ask him if he has some part Subbotnik.

  187. @SPMoore8
    Like I said before, I think most Americans who mention NA ancestry are, like Elizabeth Warren, people with upper middle class pretensions who want to mention this ancestry because it confers a certain cachet, and while the biological basis may be slim to none there probably is some level of cultural association (as with many Americans with Southern, Frontier, or French Canadian heritages). In my case, the cultural definitely outweighs any potential genetics, so I am not going to spend the money to find out either way. But maybe my sister will .... if she is my sister. LOL.

    On the other hand when the discussion turns to "who's a Jew" there seems to be an interest involved here, one that as a non-Jew I have a problem relating to. There appears to be two ideological elements; one, the matrilineal "purity" of Jewish descent, and two, being at least 50% Near Eastern Semitic to justify the Zionist project. Those are powerful incentives to view the data in particular ways. I don't think I have any interest either way, but then again my children have some Hungarian and Jewish background on their mother's side, so, there's that.

    “Those are powerful incentives to view the data in particular ways.” – Not only view but to manufacture data.

  188. @anon
    When you have intimate knowledge of a subject, it becomes glaringly obvious to you how much the media get it wrong when they report on it. Mostly it's out of incompetence or laziness and not malice.

    In this case of this forward writer, he appears to be incompetent.

    I’ve personally been intimately involved with three big stories . I would say that in the case of two of those stories ignorance and malice were the primary factors , with the third it was all laziness . In time I have come to believe that other than the sports scores nothing in the main stream media is to be believed .

  189. anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    “…If there is an HBD crowd angle on Jewish ancestral genetics, it’s in calling attention to the sizable Italian contribution to Ashkenazi ancestry. I wrote in 2013: “Genetic research on the ancestry of Jewish populations tends to get politicized because of the sneaking suspicion that the average Palestinian may be more closely related to the Hebrews of 70 AD than is, say, Bibi Netanyahu.”…”

    I have no way to judge anything about Jewish ancestral genetics, but I did see this story on one of the science sites awhile back, presumably data is good, etc.:

    “Prominent scholars blast theory tracing Ashkenazi Jews to Turkey”, Jewish Telegraph Agency, Cnaan Liphshiz, May 3, 2016:

    “…Titled “Localizing Ashkenazic Jews to primeval villages in the ancient Iranian lands of Ashkenaz,” the study by the University of Sheffield geneticist Eran Elhaik and three other researchers appeared in March in Oxford University Press’ prestigious scientific journal Genome Biology and Evolution. …

    …A match was found between the Jewish group’s genetic information and that of populations in northeastern Turkey…

    …Sergio DellaPergola, a prominent demographer of the Jewish people from the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, called the study, which was widely reported in mainstream media, “one of the big canards of the 21st century,”…

    …Elhaik wrote in an email to JTA: “Our study is the largest genomic study on Ashkenazic Jews to date and the first of its kind on Yiddish speakers using an unbiased tool that returns the geographical coordinates where target DNA has originated.”…

    “Scientists reveal Jewish history’s forgotten Turkish roots: Israeli-born geneticist believes the Turkish villages of Iskenaz, Eskenaz and Ashanaz were part of the original homeland for Ashkenazic Jews”, The Independent, David Keys, Tuesday 19 April 2016:

    “…New research suggests that the majority of the world’s modern Jewish population is descended mainly from people from ancient Turkey…

    …are the descendants of Greeks, Iranians and others who colonized what is now northern Turkey more than 2000 years ago…

    …He believes that the word Ashkenaz originally comes from Ashguza – the ancient Assyrian and Babylonian name for the Iron Age Eurasian steppeland people, the Scythians…

    …Referring to the names of the three Turkish villages, Dr Elhaik points out that “north-east Turkey is the only place in the world where these place-names exist”…”

    A short summary write-up by Elhaik:

    “How DNA traced the Ashkenazic Jews to northeastern Turkey”, Eran Elhaik, aeon:

    “…genetics can now track DNA 1,500 years into the past, with village-level geographical accuracy. This accuracy was made possible with Geographical Population Structure (GPS) technology, which works in a similar way to the satnav geolocation system, and uses DNA instead of satellites to predict the most recent geographical origins of a DNA sample. To study the geographical origins of Yiddish, the native language of Ashkenazic Jews, my lab at the University of Sheffield has applied this GPS technology to the DNA of Ashkenazic Jews. Surprisingly, the results led us to northeastern Turkey, a finding that contradicts the orthodox view that the Ashkenazic Jewry emerged in Germany. …

    …the ancestry of nearly all Ashkenazic Jews could be traced to four ancient villages with remarkable names: Iskenaz (or Eskenaz), Eskenez (or Eskens), Ashanas, and Aschuz (30BCE-640CE). These names might be derived from the word ‘Ashkenaz’, and are unique to northeastern Turkey. …

    …Until the first century BCE, the region was part of the Greek Kingdom of Pontus. It had been established by Greek settlers in the early first millennium. At that time, Iranian Jews were the largest Jewish community in the world. They held a monopoly on trading on the Silk Roads, and were known to Judaise the people they encountered.”

    These stories don’t mention that one of the authors of the paper “Localizing Ashkenazic Jews to primeval villages in the ancient Iranian lands of Ashkenaz”, Ranajit Das, Paul Wexler, Mehdi Pirooznia, and Eran Elhaik, Genome Biology and Evolution, Advance Access, March 3, 2016, is Paul Wexler of the Tel Aviv University Department of Linguistics.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    No, the paper was not good, in part because the authors understood their reference populations poorly as discussed by Razib Khan. There are several other papers that disagree with Elhaik's that have come out since then.
  190. @Anonymous
    Its not real difficult for intelligent open-minded adults to grasp just exactly how ignoring the reality of HBD has negatively impacted the US for the past 50 years.

    Please give some examples.

    When less intelligent people are hired in preference to more intelligent people, bad decisions result which have huge opportunity costs. IQ by itself is a better predictor of job performance than all the usual hiring criteria combined. (see Hunter and Schmidt)

    For every Black who has a job, there are several Whites who are more competent, some of whom are unemployed or have worse jobs than the Black. The preference for Blacks has many direct victims and everyone is an indirect victim due to Blacks predictably doing worse than Whites at every job.

  191. @Steve Sailer
    Perhaps Razib and HBD Chick feel that way about me!

    Razib is a good thinker but a crap writer – his stuff is impenetrable without a lot of work, and I for one, just can’t be arsed. JayMan and HBD chick are easy to read, comprehend and imbibe, Razib isn’t. And Razib is something of a rude prick, which doesn’t help.

    He would be alot better with an attitude upgrade (and I’m not looking for mister fluffy, Steve is turbo sarcastic, yet has no edges whatsoever), he would be well advised to imbibe and take to heart Steven Pinker’s A sense of style.

    • Replies: @Anon
    The problem with that is that what JayMan and HBD Chick have to say is gibberish.
  192. @Anonymous
    "and find that here actually do not be dragons…."

    Not to disagree with the gist of your post, but there do be dragons here. Metaphorically speaking--and what else is the myth of a knight mounting his steed and riding forth to do battle with a fire-breathing, hellish, devouring demon--what Sailor and others are doing when they take on the reigning dogma of those who hold the Megaphone is tantamount to slaying the proverbial dragon. It is a battle between a seemingly outgunned lone man armed with little more than his courage against a terrifying, far more powerful fire-breathing beast (our press).

    But the beast's power turns out to be illusory in the face of true courage. As in Campbell's Hero with a Thousand Faces and Jung's archetype of the Hero, the protagonist must act with complete belief in himself in spite of the seeming hopelessness of his task. With this and aid from a Muse--always an inspiring woman such as she who bears the scales of Justice or bare-breasted Liberty leading the people--he will succeed.

    Van Gogh said that "just when you feel like giving up in despair is the very moment that you must push forward, for that is when the breakthrough occurs" (paraphrased). Courage is not how you behave when sitting in your favorite chair in the comfort of your living room, but how you respond when all hope is lost.

    Thanks, I needed this.

  193. @Anonymous
    "and find that here actually do not be dragons…."

    Not to disagree with the gist of your post, but there do be dragons here. Metaphorically speaking--and what else is the myth of a knight mounting his steed and riding forth to do battle with a fire-breathing, hellish, devouring demon--what Sailor and others are doing when they take on the reigning dogma of those who hold the Megaphone is tantamount to slaying the proverbial dragon. It is a battle between a seemingly outgunned lone man armed with little more than his courage against a terrifying, far more powerful fire-breathing beast (our press).

    But the beast's power turns out to be illusory in the face of true courage. As in Campbell's Hero with a Thousand Faces and Jung's archetype of the Hero, the protagonist must act with complete belief in himself in spite of the seeming hopelessness of his task. With this and aid from a Muse--always an inspiring woman such as she who bears the scales of Justice or bare-breasted Liberty leading the people--he will succeed.

    Van Gogh said that "just when you feel like giving up in despair is the very moment that you must push forward, for that is when the breakthrough occurs" (paraphrased). Courage is not how you behave when sitting in your favorite chair in the comfort of your living room, but how you respond when all hope is lost.

    Complete belief in himself in spite of the seeming hopelessness of his task. Thanks, I needed this.

  194. @Anonymous
    Its not real difficult for intelligent open-minded adults to grasp just exactly how ignoring the reality of HBD has negatively impacted the US for the past 50 years.

    Please give some examples.

    Please see US Department of Education. Or check any organization requiring standardized testing. My, you are obtuse. Are you a NYFD female cadet?

  195. @BB753
    I hope this old piece by blogger Hipster Racist about lonely Heidi will give you a laugh:

    https://eradica.wordpress.com/2013/06/03/50-pounds-of-heidi/

    Love it! Thanks a million.

    • Replies: @BB753
    You're welcome!
  196. @bored identity
    thinkingaboutrat says:

    "....Before that black chick won the gymnastics medal this year, I’m sure there were a bunch of people saying the same thing about heavy bone structure in blacks, and their unsuitability for the finesse of gymnastics. While ignoring the fact that most black chicks don’t do gymnastics at the same rate as Whites do. ...."


    The real problem here is that in nowadays environment it doesn't take too much for one to be called plain stupid,90 IQ dummy in Appalachia,redneck,idiot ...

    Few years ago, Italian Gymnastics Federation spokesperson David Ciaralli was trying to defend a young national team athlete after she made a snarky comments about the Italians needed to have black skin to beat rivals like Simone Biles.

    At face value, the comment sounds tasteless and racist.

    But then , Ciaralli tried to clarify the context in which the unfortunate comment was made:

    She was referring to " a trend in gymnastics at this moment, which is going towards a technique that opens up new chances to athletes of color (well-known for power)” while penalizing the more artistic Eastern European style that allowed Russians and Romanians to dominate the sport for years."
     
    Could it be a case? Who knows.
    After all, a creative tempering with a rules and criteria to adopt to certain traits of the certain groups is something that totaly never happens in this country.

    That just reminded me of something called a firefighter exam.

    Oh,I know.

    You 're going to tell me how I'm ignoring the fact that most black chicks don’t do firefighting at the same rate as Whites do.
    Or is it just the fact that it’s mostly middle-class or upper-class people who have good access to fire hoses (damn Bull Connor!), and the training that’s required to become a world-class fire-chief?

    Anyway,instead of spirited debate among the experts , we had a usual situation of social justice grinding aparatus,( also well-known for power) being prestissimo activated to smear a miserable racist spokeperson:


    David Ciaralli defended Ferlito in a way that recalled statements that led to the firing of Dodgers’ general manager Al Campanis in 1987
     
    And then we got this unorthodox, gawkeresque piece of cognitive dissonance from an orthodox ex -gymnast that's just begging for a Steve's deconstruction:


    What is this belief based on? That's where Ciaralli's remarks about artistry come in.

    They are part of a larger ongoing conversation amongst coaches, athletes, judges, and fans as to the direction of the sport, on whether it moves in a more artistic direction or towards power and tricks, as though those are mutually exclusive categories. Most of these debates usually end with artistry supporters reminding everyone that the sport is called "artistic gymnastics," never mind that no one can agree what "artistry" in gymnastics means.

     
    http://deadspin.com/simone-biles-vs-the-racists-are-black-gymnasts-the-ne-1443998882

    Dude, in sport there are scores. In competitions, there are judges. Sport is for men, competition is how extravaganzas such as the Olympic Games attract female viewers and ratings. I personally find synchronized competition such as diving and swimming and ribbon twirling most risible but that’s just me.

  197. @Alec Leamas

    The reality is somewhere in-between, where, for example, a genetic predisposition to asthma (more common among Jews) may be worsened by living in smoggy Mexico City or mitigated by moving to Phoenix. The science of that in-between is called epigenetics, the study of the environmental effect on gene expression.
     
    Is it really epigenetics that would predict that asthmatics suffer worse symptoms in places with more respiratory irritants?

    Human biodiversity is stuck at the moment when geneticists were able to show that distinct ethnic and geographical populations have distinct genomes and are therefore distinguishable from other groups (albeit under a microscope). The evidence of these genetic isolates is, for the HBD community, evidence of different races.
     
    This guy evidently needs a microscope to tell a West African and a Swede apart.

    Or his rectum from a hole in the ground.

  198. @Kylie
    Love it! Thanks a million.

    You’re welcome!

  199. @Jean Cocteausten

    What do you find nutty about racism?
     
    You're right; I am identifying being nutty with being racist and I will concede that not all racists are nutty.

    My concern is this: Almost every iSteve post draws at least a few juvenile comments that almost everybody would consider racist and that add nothing to the discussion. It may feel good to post that sort of thing, but all it does is make it easier for e.g. the Forward to portray Steve as a crackpot, which he most assuredly is not.

    Now, there are many other posts on iSteve that most people would consider racist, but which are nevertheless true and should be read by everyone. But too many of the first kind of post means nobody will stick around to read the second kind of post.

    Yeah, nobody’s here, including me and you.

  200. @Kevin O'Keeffe

    My favs in the list are “radical traditional Catholicism” and “general hate.”
     
    That's my ideology. I am an advocate of general hate. We're a beleaguered faction, admittedly, but one day, we hope to spread general hatred across society. Will you join us in our noble struggle?

    Count me in.

  201. @Jack D
    X and Y chromosomes (especially Y) both carry very few important genes, for obvious reasons - if say the gene for coding hemoglobin was on the Y gene and women lacked it, they would die and not be capable of reproduction. Or if it was on the X and women had two copies, they would make too much hemoglobin and die because of that. So very little of major physical importance (aside from things that code for the reproductive system and secondary sexual characteristics) is left on those chromosomes. Of course there are still lots of subtle differences in strength, temperament, etc. but the basics are the same even to the point that men have nipples.

    Where are all these very important genes hiding?

    • Replies: @Jack D
    On the 22 chromosomes that men and women have in common.
  202. Well, this is progress! Steven Jay Gould and others used to maintain that race did not have a well-defined genetic basis. At least Ari Feldman admits to “scientifically proven (and therefore apolitical) genetic differences between groups of humans”; though he somehow equates this with “pseudoscientific racism”.

    Feldman himself may be one of those “people with little to no scientific training who spend their free time learning the scientific argot”, since he appears somewhat confused about the definition of epigenetics.

  203. @Bee
    Palestinian Muslims and other Arabs in the region are heavily descended from the Muslim Arabs who came to the Levant in the 600s and onwards. So I don't see why Netanyahu needs to look like Arafat (not that resemblance of this sort proves anything).

    Why does no one care how genetically close modern Irish or English (no, not recent immigrants) are to the people who lived in those countries 2000 years ago?

    Just about no ethnic group is the same genetically as it was 2000 years ago. But Jews are closer than most.

    Why I’m so old I remember when Semite referred to every citizen of the Near and Middle East. Semite is not a religious descriptor. It also bothers me when people say Catholic when they mean Roman Catholic. Everyone used to know that all Christians, even Protestants, are Catholic.

    • Replies: @Former Darfur
    It also bothers me when people say Catholic when they mean Roman Catholic. Everyone used to know that all Christians, even Protestants, are Catholic.

    Presumably all Christians are Orthodox as well and all churches are Assemblies of God (sic) and use the Bible and most are practitioners of baptis (m) but we know exactly what is meant when we say the Catholic Church, the Baptist Church, the Assemblies of God Church, et al.

    Also, in the case of THE Catholic Church, there are Catholic Churches in accord with Rome-who acknowledge the Pope as the head of the church-which are not Roman, e.g,, the Eastern Rite Catholic Churches.

  204. @SPMoore8
    I agree with everything you say except that IIRC there is a long tradition of "Judaizers" in Russia going back to medieval times, and perhaps there's some crossover there, too.

    Now that we have established that Ari Feldman is wrong to attribute the "Khazar thesis" to HBD generally, I will devote the rest of my remarks to what I believe is his wrong construal of "epigenetics."

    The "Nature" (genetics) vs. "Nurture" (environment) is understood to be interactive, since genetic propensities in one area (see the MAOA gene issue as discussed earlier) can be aggravated by the environment. On a common sense level this is nothing more than the recognition that if certain types of cancers run in your family, you should get more regular checkups, or, if early congestive heart disease runs in your family, you should try to surmount it by exercise and diet (from what I have seen, with limited success, unfortunately.)

    However, "epigenetics" is not some sort of half way house between the two. It argues that specific environmental pressures can actually trigger changes in the gene. Again, I think the classic case has to do with Dutchmen during the WW2 era famine, that supposedly changed the gene expression which was then passed on to their kids. That this sounds like Lamarckianism (Giraffes have long necks because they were always stretching them to get to the higher branches) or Lysenkoism (soaking wheat in cold water will turn it into winter wheat) -- both long discredited -- is not my fault.

    I think my main problem with "epigenetics" is that it supposes a kind of rationalizing and and intentionalizing of genetic mutations that contradicts the randomness of mutation that is implicit in evolution. On the other hand it is not about environment affecting actual life development; as though the offspring of a couple of morons is only a nutritious school lunch away from being a neurosurgeon.

    However, “epigenetics” is not some sort of half way house between the two. It argues that specific environmental pressures can actually trigger changes in the gene.

    Really? I thought it only referred to gene expression during the process of development. So, yes, a halfway house, one might say.

    • Replies: @SPMoore8
    What I was objecting to is the notion that epigenetics as it pertains to gene expression is heritable. I am highly skeptical of that, since it appears to be a micro-progression of what Lamarck and Lysenko argued which has long been disowned. It's conceivable, but I am not ready to talk about the gene expression of folk memories just yet.

    As it pertains to what I said already, epigenetics simply pertains to the way genes may be expressed due to environmental factors, but I assume this means the impact as per the MAOA bit I previously referenced. What that would mean is that an inherited gene is expressed differently due to environmental pressures. I don't have a problem with that, but it is not the half way house the Forward author envisions, inasmuch as he seems to think that epigenetics can compensate for heredity, thus rendering hereditary differences moot. I don't think that is the case.
  205. @Jack D
    I visited Trakai in Lithuania and saw what was left of the Karaite community (not much despite the fact that the Germans did not try to kill them).

    Nothing written in any of these entries contradicts what I said - the Karaites and the Yiddish speaking Ashkenazi Rabbinic Jews hated each other and did not intermix - the narcissism of small difference and all that. Karaites and the other Judaizing sects (aside from their religious and genetic differences and physical differences in location) did not occupy the same ecological niche as Ashkenazi Jews - they continued farming the land and serving as troops for the Lithuanian kings, etc. so they would have been an uneasy fit for the Jews in any case. If they had been another middleman minority (say Chinese) they would have been a better fit and might have eventually merged (lots of Jew-Asian hybrids in the US nowadays) but as it was, it was more like the relationship between American Ashkenazi Jews and uneducated ghetto "Black Jews" like Michelle's cousin the "rabbi" (without any actual rabbinical training), who adopted a folk Judaism . Jews considered these folks to be ignorant and unlearned (where to be learned was the highest value) and totally unsuitable candidates for marriage. Just because D'Shavious puts on a prayer shawl (upside down because he can't really read the writing) doesn't mean you are going to let him marry your daughter.

    When the Subbotniks got to Israel, they were eventually accepted as Jews (the Zionist being non-religious and in need of all the help they could get) but their contribution to the Ashkenazi Jewish genome outside of Israel is nil.

    Jack D wrote: “Ashkenazi Jews […] If they had been another middleman minority (say Chinese) they would have been a better fit and might have eventually merged (lots of Jew-Asian hybrids in the US nowadays)”

    Actually, this merging also happened once in the distant past. See my article “The Chinese Lady Who Joined the Ashkenazic People” in Jewish Times Asia, March 2015, page 19

    It turns out the part-Asian Khazars have nothing to do with Ashkenazic ancestry, but we had no reason to believe the East Asian contribution came from Chinese rather than Khazars (some of whom converted to Judaism) before comprehensive genetic data became available. In hindsight I wouldn’t have spent two decades researching the Khazar theory of Ashkenazic ancestry had I known what I know now.

    As for Karaites in Eastern Europe, they generally stayed apart from Ashkenazic Jews, as you said, but not always, and there were rare instances of intermarriage between those groups.

  206. @Bee
    People really need to stop using this word, "apparently", about totally factually accurate information that doesn't agree with their own pre-conceptions.

    BTW, according to this genetic study, "a pre-Islamic expansion Levant was more genetically similar to Europeans than to Middle Easterners", which fits in with the idea that Mr. Arafat was probably heavily descended from people who came to the Levant in the 600s and onwards.

    http://journals.plos.org/plosgenetics/article?id=10.1371/journal.pgen.1003316

    “a pre-Islamic expansion Levant was more genetically similar to Europeans than to Middle Easterners”

    In part, that may be because the pre-Islamic expansion Levantines had less sub-Saharan admixture than modern Middle Easterners.

  207. @Jean Cocteausten

    What do you find nutty about racism?
     
    You're right; I am identifying being nutty with being racist and I will concede that not all racists are nutty.

    My concern is this: Almost every iSteve post draws at least a few juvenile comments that almost everybody would consider racist and that add nothing to the discussion. It may feel good to post that sort of thing, but all it does is make it easier for e.g. the Forward to portray Steve as a crackpot, which he most assuredly is not.

    Now, there are many other posts on iSteve that most people would consider racist, but which are nevertheless true and should be read by everyone. But too many of the first kind of post means nobody will stick around to read the second kind of post.

    Now, there are many other posts on iSteve that most people would consider racist, but which are nevertheless true and should be read by everyone. But too many of the first kind of post means nobody will stick around to read the second kind of post.

    Your thinking is muddled, and I suspect it is because you’re lazy. Many of the comments will be “racist,” since “racism” is the act of denoting personal or social benefits or deficiencies related to a particular race.

    Stop using the term “racist” as the swiss army knife word to whittle down any fact or assertion that makes you feel bad, or you’ll keep looking foolish.

    You could say “cheap shot,” or “anecdotal evidence” to communicate your ire, but using “racist” pejoratively is just you being an “self-sanctimonious, manipulative, lazy turd.”

    Grow up.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    I agree that the word "racist" has been devalued to become an all-purpose epithet for "people I don't like", but what word would you use distinguish between the scientific HBD types and the insane ranting "Joos are out to destroy Western Civilization" / Protocols of the Elders of Zion type commenters here?
  208. No mention in the Forward of the best known HBD thinker’s best known theory: Ashkenazim have the highest average IQs. A representative overview of HDD from Cochran in conversation with James Miller. https://westhunt.wordpress.com/2016/08/10/interview/

    Re some points raised in the above the above discussion

    http://bogost.com/writing/the_great_pretender/
    Turing’s coroner wrote, “In a man of his type, one never knows what his mental processes are going to do next.” It’s easy to take this statement as a slight, an insult against a national hero whose culture took him as a criminal just for being a gay man. But can’t you also see it differently, more generously? Everyone—everything—is one of his or her or its own type, its internal processes forever hidden from view, its real nature only partly depicted through its behavior. As heirs to Turing’s legacy, the best we can do is admit it. Everyone pretends. And everything is more than we can ever see of it.

    Von Neaumann had deficits in pretending/Triveresque self deception; Russia was (still is) the natural enemy of Germany and our once and (maybe still) future salvation. Being wrong about Soviet in the Thirties was very common in Von Neumann circle, but being “right” about what Stalin was about and saying so, was a serious practical mistake. Complaining about Hitler was not going to do anything to stop Germany. Von Neaumann’s friends should be congratulated on having resisted the temptation to give him a good shake.

    Re gem warfare. Never mind Stalingrad, I want to know whether the Yamnaya conquest of Northern Europe was being enabled by the plague they are said to have been carrying?

  209. @Anonymous
    It's sort of unfair to class someone like hbdchick with figures like Sailer or Razib Khan. hbdchick is a nice person but not really erudite or sharp enough to be classed with them.

    Razib: sharper than hbdchick

  210. @Bert
    Where are all these very important genes hiding?

    On the 22 chromosomes that men and women have in common.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    The Y chromosome does have very few genes other than those related to sex determination, but that is not the case for the Y chromosome. For instance, the genes for coagulation Factor VIII and Factor IX are located on the X chromosome. That's why hemophilia shows X-linked inheritance.
    , @Bert
    OK, I'll go take a look and report back.
    , @rob
    Jack, the X chromosome has a butt-ton of important genes. Give 'X-linked disorder' or even 'X chromosome" a google.
  211. @yowza

    Now, there are many other posts on iSteve that most people would consider racist, but which are nevertheless true and should be read by everyone. But too many of the first kind of post means nobody will stick around to read the second kind of post.
     
    Your thinking is muddled, and I suspect it is because you're lazy. Many of the comments will be "racist," since "racism" is the act of denoting personal or social benefits or deficiencies related to a particular race.

    Stop using the term "racist" as the swiss army knife word to whittle down any fact or assertion that makes you feel bad, or you'll keep looking foolish.

    You could say "cheap shot," or "anecdotal evidence" to communicate your ire, but using "racist" pejoratively is just you being an "self-sanctimonious, manipulative, lazy turd."

    Grow up.

    I agree that the word “racist” has been devalued to become an all-purpose epithet for “people I don’t like”, but what word would you use distinguish between the scientific HBD types and the insane ranting “Joos are out to destroy Western Civilization” / Protocols of the Elders of Zion type commenters here?

    • Replies: @iffen
    insane ranting “Joos are out to destroy Western Civilization” / Protocols of the Elders of Zion type commenters here?

    They are called anti-Semites.
  212. @Jack D

    Just about no ethnic group is the same genetically as it was 2000 years ago. But Jews are closer than most.
     
    If by 2,000 years you mean the Jews living in Judea during the lifetime of Jesus, then no, you are only half right. But if you mean shortly thereafter - say the Jews living in Italy shortly after the destruction of the Temple (so call it 1900 years) then yes. There was clearly an early European-Middle Eastern mixing event that produced the Jews who are around today and after that they stayed remarkably isolated from the surrounding population for a really long time (remarkable considering for example that American Jews will be largely intermixed in only a couple of generations).

    Ashkenazi Jews have a small Northern European ancestral component, which the author’s of this recent paper favor to be of Eastern European origin. Greg Cochran has also written about this paper at his blog.

  213. @anonymous
    "...If there is an HBD crowd angle on Jewish ancestral genetics, it’s in calling attention to the sizable Italian contribution to Ashkenazi ancestry. I wrote in 2013: “Genetic research on the ancestry of Jewish populations tends to get politicized because of the sneaking suspicion that the average Palestinian may be more closely related to the Hebrews of 70 AD than is, say, Bibi Netanyahu.”..."

    I have no way to judge anything about Jewish ancestral genetics, but I did see this story on one of the science sites awhile back, presumably data is good, etc.:

    "Prominent scholars blast theory tracing Ashkenazi Jews to Turkey", Jewish Telegraph Agency, Cnaan Liphshiz, May 3, 2016:


    "...Titled “Localizing Ashkenazic Jews to primeval villages in the ancient Iranian lands of Ashkenaz,” the study by the University of Sheffield geneticist Eran Elhaik and three other researchers appeared in March in Oxford University Press’ prestigious scientific journal Genome Biology and Evolution. ...

    ...A match was found between the Jewish group’s genetic information and that of populations in northeastern Turkey...

    ...Sergio DellaPergola, a prominent demographer of the Jewish people from the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, called the study, which was widely reported in mainstream media, “one of the big canards of the 21st century,”...

    ...Elhaik wrote in an email to JTA: “Our study is the largest genomic study on Ashkenazic Jews to date and the first of its kind on Yiddish speakers using an unbiased tool that returns the geographical coordinates where target DNA has originated.”...

     

    "Scientists reveal Jewish history's forgotten Turkish roots: Israeli-born geneticist believes the Turkish villages of Iskenaz, Eskenaz and Ashanaz were part of the original homeland for Ashkenazic Jews", The Independent, David Keys, Tuesday 19 April 2016:


    "...New research suggests that the majority of the world’s modern Jewish population is descended mainly from people from ancient Turkey...

    ...are the descendants of Greeks, Iranians and others who colonized what is now northern Turkey more than 2000 years ago...

    ...He believes that the word Ashkenaz originally comes from Ashguza - the ancient Assyrian and Babylonian name for the Iron Age Eurasian steppeland people, the Scythians...

    ...Referring to the names of the three Turkish villages, Dr Elhaik points out that “north-east Turkey is the only place in the world where these place-names exist”..."

     

    A short summary write-up by Elhaik:

    "How DNA traced the Ashkenazic Jews to northeastern Turkey", Eran Elhaik, aeon:


    "...genetics can now track DNA 1,500 years into the past, with village-level geographical accuracy. This accuracy was made possible with Geographical Population Structure (GPS) technology, which works in a similar way to the satnav geolocation system, and uses DNA instead of satellites to predict the most recent geographical origins of a DNA sample. To study the geographical origins of Yiddish, the native language of Ashkenazic Jews, my lab at the University of Sheffield has applied this GPS technology to the DNA of Ashkenazic Jews. Surprisingly, the results led us to northeastern Turkey, a finding that contradicts the orthodox view that the Ashkenazic Jewry emerged in Germany. ...

    ...the ancestry of nearly all Ashkenazic Jews could be traced to four ancient villages with remarkable names: Iskenaz (or Eskenaz), Eskenez (or Eskens), Ashanas, and Aschuz (30BCE-640CE). These names might be derived from the word ‘Ashkenaz’, and are unique to northeastern Turkey. ...

    ...Until the first century BCE, the region was part of the Greek Kingdom of Pontus. It had been established by Greek settlers in the early first millennium. At that time, Iranian Jews were the largest Jewish community in the world. They held a monopoly on trading on the Silk Roads, and were known to Judaise the people they encountered."

     

    These stories don't mention that one of the authors of the paper "Localizing Ashkenazic Jews to primeval villages in the ancient Iranian lands of Ashkenaz", Ranajit Das, Paul Wexler, Mehdi Pirooznia, and Eran Elhaik, Genome Biology and Evolution, Advance Access, March 3, 2016, is Paul Wexler of the Tel Aviv University Department of Linguistics.

    No, the paper was not good, in part because the authors understood their reference populations poorly as discussed by Razib Khan. There are several other papers that disagree with Elhaik’s that have come out since then.

  214. @Steve Sailer
    Comments on blogs are a good place to try out hypotheses that might or might not be right.

    True. I submit the occasional borderline insane post and you generally quash them, for which I thank you profusely after a good night’s sleep.

  215. @Jack D
    On the 22 chromosomes that men and women have in common.

    The Y chromosome does have very few genes other than those related to sex determination, but that is not the case for the Y chromosome. For instance, the genes for coagulation Factor VIII and Factor IX are located on the X chromosome. That’s why hemophilia shows X-linked inheritance.

  216. @Jack D
    On the 22 chromosomes that men and women have in common.

    OK, I’ll go take a look and report back.

  217. Anon • Disclaimer says:

    she seems particularly consumed by the inbreeding habits of Ashkenazi Jews

    To be honest, if anything she’s been obsessed with the inbreeding habits of Muslims. Which I would assume he doesn’t cite because he’s writing for a Jewish audience who’d respond “Sound minded girl” and not a Millennial audience who’d go “So Islamophobic!”).

    or the supposed Khazarian origin of the Jewish people

    Slightly amusing in light of Razib Khan and the whole HBD web pretty much saying a) this is wrong, b) Khan himself continuously being usually reblogged and spoken with by actual serious researchers in this field.

    The science of that in-between is called epigenetics, the study of the environmental effect on gene expression.

    The word epigenetics really is a dog whistle for “I really don’t know quite what I’m talking about, do I?”.

  218. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @ben tillman

    Well that’s because it’s personal with you.
     
    Not in the least. The problem is that his ability to do "science" stops when he encounters analysis that quantifies the fact that native populations are harmed by the presence of immigrants like Razib. When it's politically expedient, he actually denies that living things have an interest in staying alive! Here's one of his comments on Salter and EGI:

    http://www.gnxp.com/MT2/archives/003501.html

    Like I said, it’s personal with you. He disputed an issue that has moral significance to you. Regardless of one’s position on Salter’s views, Salter himself states at the outset of his work that he’s not attempting to describe how biological organisms actually behave, which means he’s taking a controversial meta position that’s open to dispute.

    • Replies: @ben tillman

    Like I said, it’s personal with you. He disputed an issue that has moral significance to you.
     
    That's not what "personal" means. What you might say is that I was paying attention when Razib revealed that, for him, politics trumps science.

    Regardless of one’s position on Salter’s views, Salter himself states at the outset of his work that he’s not attempting to describe how biological organisms actually behave, which means he’s taking a controversial meta position that’s open to dispute.
     
    It means nothing of the sort. He wasn't talking about "how biological organisms actually behave". He simply pointed out the cost of being invaded and replaced and advised that people not allow themselves to be invaded and replaced. He pointed out that this prescription was universalizable and suggested a policy of non-aggressive "universal nationalism".
  219. 1. National Polls ignore how presidential elections work. They’re imperfect, at best.
    2. Trump’s getting a reverse Bradley effect, win or lose. Bank on that.
    3. Clinton’s consistently below 50 in the polls. Reuters poll from last week had her at 42%, LA Times/USC had her at 46, etc. Show me a pol who’s bragging about getting 42 or 46 % in a head-to-head election, and I’ll show you a dummy politician.

    I guess we’ll just have to wait and see. Polls don’t decide elections any more than point spreads decide games.

    • Replies: @The most deplorable one
    This poll is pretty interesting:

    http://abcnewsgo.co/2016/08/abc-live-poll-who-are-you-voting-for/

    In case they take it down, at the moment it is showing 96,140 total votes:

    Trump: 66,237 or 69%
    Stein: 13,023 or 14%
    Johnson: 11,039 or 11%
    Clinton: 5,416 or 4%
    Castle: 425, or 0%
  220. Anon • Disclaimer says:
    @Clathrus
    it would probably not include a lot of African genes or brown genes in general. You would end up with some kind of white-Ashkenazi-E. Asian hapa hybrid

    As far as superficial appearance goes, why restrict humanity to preexisting genetic variation? All kinds of novel changes could be made.
    It should be possible to give the new humans a distinctive look unlike any existing people. Give them a new physiognomy with pink hair and green skin or something. No ethnic group need feel discriminated against because we'd be replacing ourselves in entirety.

    Another nice alternative is to deliberately make the new humans look like sub-Saharan Africans. I imagine that many here would object to that, but I wouldn't mind at all. I have no use for atavistic ethnocentrism. It really is what's on the inside that counts. The one way in which they probably have to differ from any existing group is in cranial capacity. I'm guessing they will be born by Cesarean section.

    Another nice alternative is to deliberately make the new humans look like sub-Saharan Africans. I imagine that many here would object to that, but I wouldn’t mind at all.

    Yeah, most of variants for Black or White appearance are just going to be a few hundred or thousands. Most of the skin colour’s understood, hair structure and the facial shape is getting there. If CRISPR / CAS-9 tech gets good enough might end up being perfectly possible to tweak things so you’ve got parents doing an Angelina and having an interracial family who are all their own genetic offspring (and also phenotypes beyond what we know). I’d be pretty fine with that tbh, screw the people in the hbdsphere with no interest in the science beyond ranting on about the ineffable profound beauty of White women / men and what have you. If you can go for Brazilian diversity in appearance without Brazilian IQs, that’s probably fine. Seems like a better world than one where everyone looks Chinese / White.

  221. @NickG
    Razib is a good thinker but a crap writer - his stuff is impenetrable without a lot of work, and I for one, just can't be arsed. JayMan and HBD chick are easy to read, comprehend and imbibe, Razib isn't. And Razib is something of a rude prick, which doesn't help.

    He would be alot better with an attitude upgrade (and I'm not looking for mister fluffy, Steve is turbo sarcastic, yet has no edges whatsoever), he would be well advised to imbibe and take to heart Steven Pinker's A sense of style.

    The problem with that is that what JayMan and HBD Chick have to say is gibberish.

  222. @Broski
    I dunno, methinks Mr. Feldman understands exactly that HBD is true, and wants to let the Jewish Daily Forward's readers know so, too. Hence, it is "a piece of the 'alt-right' puzzle of bigotry you need to know more about." Obviously, he can't say it's true in the Forward, or that would be another useful footnote for future reference, a la Saletan's admission of many years ago. In fairness, he does link to you, Razib, and HBD Chick toward the top of the article, which has probably just created a thousand or more new, Jewish HBD realists. Unfortunately, said realists may be dishonest about it, as we can assume Gould, Lewontin, and their ilk have been. Do some people just not care, at all, about lying?

    Sailer, who founded the Human Biodiversity Institute, maintains a blog at the Unz Review, writing about the dating prospects of Asian men and the inadequacies of gay men and lesbians, among other things.
     
    LOL!

    PS, something humorous (hopefully this won't be enough to out me to the Mossad, but I'm sure Google has already told them about us all): The ad at the top of the Forward was for something called JScreen, which screens Jewish people for (almost always neurological, I wonder why) Jewish recessive genetic disorders! LOLOLOLOL!

    For more: https://jscreen.org . In fairness, though, I have to wonder whether that chick in JScreen's picture is a Shiksa.

    I had to giggle a the pop-up that encouraged me to get “the Jewish take on the news!”. I guess we’re all so much the same that we’re different.

    I found it heartening that nobody in the comment section was defending Feldman.

    • Replies: @Ivy
    Feldman is a man outstanding in his field, or at least should be. That is the extent of the defense that may be offered. Perhaps his view was impacted by being from a field on the far side of the Hajnal line?
  223. I kinda wonder if some of you guys know any dumb rednecks. They’ve all swilled the anti-racist Kool-Aid. The smart rednecks, on the other hand…

    Palestinian Muslims and other Arabs in the region are heavily descended from the Muslim Arabs who came to the Levant in the 600s and onwards. So I don’t see why Netanyahu needs to look like Arafat (not that resemblance of this sort proves anything).

    Why does no one care how genetically close modern Irish or English (no, not recent immigrants) are to the people who lived in those countries 2000 years ago?

    Just about no ethnic group is the same genetically as it was 2000 years ago. But Jews are closer than most.

    Maybe if the English in England were acting more like the Jews in Israel, people would care more. Heck, maybe if the English in England had decamped from England for 1500 years, then returned to act like the Jews in Israel, people would really, REALLY care more.

    Woe is us stuff from Jews is funny. Princess and the Pea.

    (you-know-who gave racial breeding experiments a bad name anyway)

    But not 1,500 year experiment by You-Know-Who.

    • Replies: @SPMoore8
    Netanyahu is a ringer for my father, who was German and Scots Irish (with some NA possibly in there). Like me, he was frequently assumed to be Jewish or even part Negro although there is absolutely nothing about that in our family heritage, although he did take after the German side.
  224. Anon • Disclaimer says:
    @thinkingabout it
    You have to admit, Steve, some of the stuff on HBD posted in these environs can be poorly thought out, outlandish, or plain stupid. A difference between groups does not automatically provide evidence for HBD. You, as a smart individual with good analytical skills, can see this. Many of your commenters can't. And your commenters come from a highly selected group with high mean IQ. One can only imagine what happens when 90 IQ dummies in Appalachia start getting into these ideas. Ideas like all Chinese people are merely grinds, and that white folk like themselves have the unique gift of "creativity", while ignoring the fact that up until about 300 years ago Chinese art and craft were considered the most exquisite in the world.

    Take the Olympics, for instance. While I find it quite likely that Blacks have some genetic advantages in running, there are a lot of other racial quirks in the Olympics' results whose mechanism aren't so clear cut. Are Whites really good at swimming because of fat distribution and arm span? Or is it just the fact that it's mostly middle-class or upper-class people who have good access to pools, and the training that's required to become a world-class swimmer?

    Before Tiger Woods, I'm sure some "hbd-aware" redneck would have thought that Blacks (half-blacks, to be precise) were terrible at golf because of poor impulse control, or too many fast twitch muscle fibers, or poor hand-eye coordination. Sounds plausible, but I think the far more likely explanation is that blacks simply don't play golf in anything approaching the numbers of Asians and Whites. Before that black chick won the gymnastics medal this year, I'm sure there were a bunch of people saying the same thing about heavy bone structure in blacks, and their unsuitability for the finesse of gymnastics. While ignoring the fact that most black chicks don't do gymnastics at the same rate as Whites do.

    HBD is real, but the tendencies of idiots to run with their biases is equally real. Once HBD becomes more popular, you can rest assured that popular discourse on it will become so detached from reality that it will make today's PC shibboleths seem like the apex of human rationality.

    Those who work on the HBD of sex differences, of course, are on more solid ground. This is Steven Pinker's main argument in The Blank Slate, where he eschews analyzing racial differences in favor of sex differences. Granted, there are a lot of people out there who try to biologise sex differences which are highly culturally generated, but the sexists have the fact that men have an entire Y chromosome worth of difference going for them.

    thinkingaboutreit: A difference between groups does not automatically provide evidence for HBD.

    A good null hypothesis is usually half and half, unless one of the groups has quickly diverged from the other in recent time (which fits with a lot of the “WEIRD” stuff), in which case you might have a stronger reason to believe it’s not genetic, though still could be.

    ignoring the fact that up until about 300 years ago Chinese art and craft were considered the most exquisite in the world.

    I don’t believe the creativity thing, but you don’t want to go to the other end of the scale, and overfocus on the period in which Chinese civilization excelled the West, from around 500AD to 1500AD, exaggerating its length and its depth. It’s a pretty short period in the grand scheme of history and pre-history.

    The creativity thing to me really seems like a gloss for the fact that the East Asians seem to like producing entertainment and art which is relaxing, calming, and pastel, or else formal, dutiful and stiff, or else garish, hedonistic and hyperactive, very rarely liking the sort of spirited, outgoing and excitable, but measured and realistic works that the Western mind seems to prefer. Also rarely actually like rocking the boat, personally. They do not exactly have the personality of the European Enlightenment, or Renaissance (more rarely than European ancestry folk do).

    Hard to argue that personality difference is not likely to be to a degree genetic.

    But that’s not actually “creativity” (the ability to produce new ideas), it’s still less the ability to innovate scientifically and mathematically.

  225. @Svigor
    I kinda wonder if some of you guys know any dumb rednecks. They've all swilled the anti-racist Kool-Aid. The smart rednecks, on the other hand...

    Palestinian Muslims and other Arabs in the region are heavily descended from the Muslim Arabs who came to the Levant in the 600s and onwards. So I don’t see why Netanyahu needs to look like Arafat (not that resemblance of this sort proves anything).

    Why does no one care how genetically close modern Irish or English (no, not recent immigrants) are to the people who lived in those countries 2000 years ago?

    Just about no ethnic group is the same genetically as it was 2000 years ago. But Jews are closer than most.
     
    Maybe if the English in England were acting more like the Jews in Israel, people would care more. Heck, maybe if the English in England had decamped from England for 1500 years, then returned to act like the Jews in Israel, people would really, REALLY care more.

    Woe is us stuff from Jews is funny. Princess and the Pea.

    (you-know-who gave racial breeding experiments a bad name anyway)
     
    But not 1,500 year experiment by You-Know-Who.

    Netanyahu is a ringer for my father, who was German and Scots Irish (with some NA possibly in there). Like me, he was frequently assumed to be Jewish or even part Negro although there is absolutely nothing about that in our family heritage, although he did take after the German side.

  226. The most deplorable one [AKA "Fourth doorman of the apocalypse"] says:
    @Svigor
    1. National Polls ignore how presidential elections work. They're imperfect, at best.
    2. Trump's getting a reverse Bradley effect, win or lose. Bank on that.
    3. Clinton's consistently below 50 in the polls. Reuters poll from last week had her at 42%, LA Times/USC had her at 46, etc. Show me a pol who's bragging about getting 42 or 46 % in a head-to-head election, and I'll show you a dummy politician.

    I guess we'll just have to wait and see. Polls don't decide elections any more than point spreads decide games.

    This poll is pretty interesting:

    http://abcnewsgo.co/2016/08/abc-live-poll-who-are-you-voting-for/

    In case they take it down, at the moment it is showing 96,140 total votes:

    Trump: 66,237 or 69%
    Stein: 13,023 or 14%
    Johnson: 11,039 or 11%
    Clinton: 5,416 or 4%
    Castle: 425, or 0%

    • Replies: @The most deplorable one
    This seems interesting:

    http://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/2016/08/13/app-maker---trump-win-election/88640044/
  227. @Bert

    However, “epigenetics” is not some sort of half way house between the two. It argues that specific environmental pressures can actually trigger changes in the gene.
     
    Really? I thought it only referred to gene expression during the process of development. So, yes, a halfway house, one might say.

    What I was objecting to is the notion that epigenetics as it pertains to gene expression is heritable. I am highly skeptical of that, since it appears to be a micro-progression of what Lamarck and Lysenko argued which has long been disowned. It’s conceivable, but I am not ready to talk about the gene expression of folk memories just yet.

    As it pertains to what I said already, epigenetics simply pertains to the way genes may be expressed due to environmental factors, but I assume this means the impact as per the MAOA bit I previously referenced. What that would mean is that an inherited gene is expressed differently due to environmental pressures. I don’t have a problem with that, but it is not the half way house the Forward author envisions, inasmuch as he seems to think that epigenetics can compensate for heredity, thus rendering hereditary differences moot. I don’t think that is the case.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    "What I was objecting to is the notion that epigenetics as it pertains to gene expression is heritable."

    Transgenerational epigenetic changes have been observed in a number of studies at this point. Most epigenetic changes may not be heritable but there is evidence that some are.

  228. Anon • Disclaimer says:
    @Bee
    People really need to stop using this word, "apparently", about totally factually accurate information that doesn't agree with their own pre-conceptions.

    BTW, according to this genetic study, "a pre-Islamic expansion Levant was more genetically similar to Europeans than to Middle Easterners", which fits in with the idea that Mr. Arafat was probably heavily descended from people who came to the Levant in the 600s and onwards.

    http://journals.plos.org/plosgenetics/article?id=10.1371/journal.pgen.1003316

    The first ancient dna we’ve had from the Roman Era (Roman England) that matches a warm, hot, Levantine or Egyptian climate profile for where he has grown up and certainly seem to match Palestinians fairly well (at any rate, better than it does Ashkenazi Jews). That sort of ancestral mix was about before the Muslim Era, in climates like the Levantine which were in the Roman Empire. Whether it was in Israel at the time, we’ll have to wait and see (after they imminently sneak a bit more ancient dna from Iron Age Israel past the crazy beard and hat guys over the next year or so). I suspect Muslim era change for the Middle East has been rather overblown and overestimated.

  229. The most deplorable one [AKA "Fourth doorman of the apocalypse"] says:
    @The most deplorable one
    This poll is pretty interesting:

    http://abcnewsgo.co/2016/08/abc-live-poll-who-are-you-voting-for/

    In case they take it down, at the moment it is showing 96,140 total votes:

    Trump: 66,237 or 69%
    Stein: 13,023 or 14%
    Johnson: 11,039 or 11%
    Clinton: 5,416 or 4%
    Castle: 425, or 0%
  230. @Brutusale
    I had to giggle a the pop-up that encouraged me to get "the Jewish take on the news!". I guess we're all so much the same that we're different.

    I found it heartening that nobody in the comment section was defending Feldman.

    Feldman is a man outstanding in his field, or at least should be. That is the extent of the defense that may be offered. Perhaps his view was impacted by being from a field on the far side of the Hajnal line?

  231. anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    “…If there is an HBD crowd angle on Jewish ancestral genetics, it’s in calling attention to the sizable Italian contribution to Ashkenazi ancestry.”

    “European link to Jewish maternal ancestry”, Melissa Hogenboom, BBC News, 9 October 2013:

    “…This new study makes the suggestion that more than 80% of Ashkenazi Jews can trace their ultimate maternal ancestry to prehistoric Europe.”

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    That Ashkenazi mitochondrial DNA article from 2013. It has been corroborated by full genome sequencing studies that estimate approximately 50% total European admixture. Integrating the information suggests that most of the admixture is maternally derived.
  232. anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    This HBD stuff and interest in HBD can last a long time:

    “Archaeologists find first-ever Philistine cemetery in Israel Cemetery in ancient Ashkelon, dating back 2700-3000 years, proves the Philistines came from the Aegean, and that in contrast to the conventional wisdom, they were a peaceful folk.”, HAARETZ, Philippe Bohstrom, 10.07.2016:

    “A huge Philistine cemetery some 3000-years-old has been found in the Mediterranean seaport of Ashkelon. The manner of the burials proves, for the first time, that the Philistines had to have come from the Aegean Sea region, and that they had very close ties with the Phoenician world. …

    …The cemetery was found to have more then 150 individual burials dating from the 11th to 8th century BCE. The undisturbed graves have shed fresh light on a mystery bedeviling archaeologists for decades: the Philistines’ real origins. …

    …these particular individuals seemed to have been spared from strife. …

    “There is no evidence of any kind of trauma on the bones, from war on inter-personal violence,” …

    …burial practices well known from the Aegean cultural sphere…

    …storage jars, bowls and juglets, and in some rare cases fine jewelry…

    …The ancient DNA-analysis may be the final nail in the coffin that settles the debate of the Philistines origins.”

  233. It’s not just the government that uses race constantly. I have lots of friends who are very liberal doctors and it’s great fun to watch the cognitive dissonance when they excoriate you for mentioning race like it’s real (not a social construct) and then I point out that physicians use race and ethnicity and national origin constantly when they screen patients for colon cancer, lactose intolerance and so forth.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Not so much for colon cancer, and lactose intolerance is complicated (some non-European herder populations from sub-Saharan Africa and the Middle East are lactose tolerant). But definitely true for sickle cell anemia, alpha and beta-thalassemia, cystic fibrosis, Tay Sachs, Gaucher's disease, etc.
  234. @Jean Cocteausten

    What do you find nutty about racism?
     
    You're right; I am identifying being nutty with being racist and I will concede that not all racists are nutty.

    My concern is this: Almost every iSteve post draws at least a few juvenile comments that almost everybody would consider racist and that add nothing to the discussion. It may feel good to post that sort of thing, but all it does is make it easier for e.g. the Forward to portray Steve as a crackpot, which he most assuredly is not.

    Now, there are many other posts on iSteve that most people would consider racist, but which are nevertheless true and should be read by everyone. But too many of the first kind of post means nobody will stick around to read the second kind of post.

    So, as usual, we have to carefully monitor our comments lest a Badthought slip through.

    Meanwhile, the Left can say anything leftist and just rack up more Pokemon points.

  235. “The modern field of genetics has disavowed theories of human behavior that are all nature — i.e., based only on genes — just as sociologists and anthropologists have disavowed theories that are all nurture. The reality is somewhere in-between, where, for example, a genetic predisposition to asthma (more common among Jews) may be worsened by living in smoggy Mexico City or mitigated by moving to Phoenix. The science of that in-between is called epigenetics, the study of the environmental effect on gene expression.”

    Straw Man. I’ve been reading Steve for over a decade, and he consistently has stated that it is a combination of genes and environment that explain behavior and traits. Easy to take down targets when you attack ridiculous things they never said. Why not just claim Steve said he sold his soul to Satan and wants to nuke all Africans?

    The science of the ‘in-between’ is not called epigenetics. It includes epigenetics.

  236. @SPMoore8
    What I was objecting to is the notion that epigenetics as it pertains to gene expression is heritable. I am highly skeptical of that, since it appears to be a micro-progression of what Lamarck and Lysenko argued which has long been disowned. It's conceivable, but I am not ready to talk about the gene expression of folk memories just yet.

    As it pertains to what I said already, epigenetics simply pertains to the way genes may be expressed due to environmental factors, but I assume this means the impact as per the MAOA bit I previously referenced. What that would mean is that an inherited gene is expressed differently due to environmental pressures. I don't have a problem with that, but it is not the half way house the Forward author envisions, inasmuch as he seems to think that epigenetics can compensate for heredity, thus rendering hereditary differences moot. I don't think that is the case.

    “What I was objecting to is the notion that epigenetics as it pertains to gene expression is heritable.”

    Transgenerational epigenetic changes have been observed in a number of studies at this point. Most epigenetic changes may not be heritable but there is evidence that some are.

    • Replies: @SPMoore8
    I am aware that there are hereditary epigenetics explanations for some few things, and at least one that argues this for humans. I wouldn't want to get carried away here, since the idea flies in the face of the Darwinian thesis of random mutation.

    On the other hand, the author of the piece is clearly intending to use "epigenetics" to trump heredity: next stop - "Willpower", and "transgenerational responsibility". No thanks.
  237. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    Lefties are happy to use HBD whenever they can exploit it to support their arguments.

    It’s hilarious when they start their discussions saying,”race does not exist, it is an artificial construct that has no biological reality, BUT it’s useful for…” then proceed to go on to discussing how minorities are historically downtrodden and their descendants deserve more privilege today. Where is the connection between the two if there is no biological basis for race?

    How much leftist media is devoted to depicting blacks as wise, kind, generous, charismatic, etc.? If race does not exist, then why bother?

    If there is no human biodiversity, no heritable component to race, then how can modern whites be beholden for all the negative things the lefties want to claim the ancestors of whites did?

  238. @Anonymous
    "What I was objecting to is the notion that epigenetics as it pertains to gene expression is heritable."

    Transgenerational epigenetic changes have been observed in a number of studies at this point. Most epigenetic changes may not be heritable but there is evidence that some are.

    I am aware that there are hereditary epigenetics explanations for some few things, and at least one that argues this for humans. I wouldn’t want to get carried away here, since the idea flies in the face of the Darwinian thesis of random mutation.

    On the other hand, the author of the piece is clearly intending to use “epigenetics” to trump heredity: next stop – “Willpower”, and “transgenerational responsibility”. No thanks.

  239. @Anonymous
    Like I said, it's personal with you. He disputed an issue that has moral significance to you. Regardless of one's position on Salter's views, Salter himself states at the outset of his work that he's not attempting to describe how biological organisms actually behave, which means he's taking a controversial meta position that's open to dispute.

    Like I said, it’s personal with you. He disputed an issue that has moral significance to you.

    That’s not what “personal” means. What you might say is that I was paying attention when Razib revealed that, for him, politics trumps science.

    Regardless of one’s position on Salter’s views, Salter himself states at the outset of his work that he’s not attempting to describe how biological organisms actually behave, which means he’s taking a controversial meta position that’s open to dispute.

    It means nothing of the sort. He wasn’t talking about “how biological organisms actually behave”. He simply pointed out the cost of being invaded and replaced and advised that people not allow themselves to be invaded and replaced. He pointed out that this prescription was universalizable and suggested a policy of non-aggressive “universal nationalism”.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    He disagreed with something that has moral significance to you. People take things personally when their deeply held moral beliefs are disputed.

    Of course Salter from the outset takes a controversial meta position that’s open to dispute. A physicist who says that he is making various claims but not attempting to describe how physical bodies actually behave is doing the same thing.
  240. @Jack D
    On the 22 chromosomes that men and women have in common.

    Jack, the X chromosome has a butt-ton of important genes. Give ‘X-linked disorder’ or even ‘X chromosome” a google.

  241. @dr kill
    Why I'm so old I remember when Semite referred to every citizen of the Near and Middle East. Semite is not a religious descriptor. It also bothers me when people say Catholic when they mean Roman Catholic. Everyone used to know that all Christians, even Protestants, are Catholic.

    It also bothers me when people say Catholic when they mean Roman Catholic. Everyone used to know that all Christians, even Protestants, are Catholic.

    Presumably all Christians are Orthodox as well and all churches are Assemblies of God (sic) and use the Bible and most are practitioners of baptis (m) but we know exactly what is meant when we say the Catholic Church, the Baptist Church, the Assemblies of God Church, et al.

    Also, in the case of THE Catholic Church, there are Catholic Churches in accord with Rome-who acknowledge the Pope as the head of the church-which are not Roman, e.g,, the Eastern Rite Catholic Churches.

  242. @Travis
    The only President to obtain over 89% of the Black vote was Obama.
    Bill Clinton only received 83% of the Black vote in 1992.
    John Kerry obtained 89% of the Black vote in 2004

    Which Presidential candidate got the lowest percentage above 50% of votes of those who received the largest percentage of black votes?

  243. @Steve Richter
    How does HBD explain the wide range of IQ within an ethnic group? Same question with physical attributes. Once there is such a wide gap will not the smart ones break off into their own group or be the ones who survive a famine?

    Once there is such a wide gap will not the smart ones break off into their own group or be the ones who survive a famine?

    That’s what is taking place now.

  244. @Jack D
    I agree that the word "racist" has been devalued to become an all-purpose epithet for "people I don't like", but what word would you use distinguish between the scientific HBD types and the insane ranting "Joos are out to destroy Western Civilization" / Protocols of the Elders of Zion type commenters here?

    insane ranting “Joos are out to destroy Western Civilization” / Protocols of the Elders of Zion type commenters here?

    They are called anti-Semites.

    • Replies: @Art
    iffen: They are called anti-Semites.

    Sorry iffen,

    It is the Ashkenazi Jews who are the world's greatest anti-Semites. They hate the Arabs and look down on the ME Jews as inferiors. There is a cast system in Israel.

    Truth -- Art

    p.s. Every time YOU start putting down people for being group haters - all they have to do is look at Israel for a worst example.
  245. The funniest omission in this article is the fact that if some commenter on UR says that Ashkenazi Jews as a group are smarter than the average group of bears; R. Unz will come into the comment thread and call you a nitwit.

  246. @Alec Leamas

    The reality is somewhere in-between, where, for example, a genetic predisposition to asthma (more common among Jews) may be worsened by living in smoggy Mexico City or mitigated by moving to Phoenix. The science of that in-between is called epigenetics, the study of the environmental effect on gene expression.
     
    Is it really epigenetics that would predict that asthmatics suffer worse symptoms in places with more respiratory irritants?

    Human biodiversity is stuck at the moment when geneticists were able to show that distinct ethnic and geographical populations have distinct genomes and are therefore distinguishable from other groups (albeit under a microscope). The evidence of these genetic isolates is, for the HBD community, evidence of different races.
     
    This guy evidently needs a microscope to tell a West African and a Swede apart.

    This guy evidently needs a microscope to tell a West African and a Swede apart.

    It should be said it’s getting harder every day.

  247. @AndrewR
    Incompetence and malice are not mutually exclusive...

    Look at Hillary.

  248. @anonymous
    "…If there is an HBD crowd angle on Jewish ancestral genetics, it’s in calling attention to the sizable Italian contribution to Ashkenazi ancestry."


    "European link to Jewish maternal ancestry", Melissa Hogenboom, BBC News, 9 October 2013:


    "...This new study makes the suggestion that more than 80% of Ashkenazi Jews can trace their ultimate maternal ancestry to prehistoric Europe."

     

    That Ashkenazi mitochondrial DNA article from 2013. It has been corroborated by full genome sequencing studies that estimate approximately 50% total European admixture. Integrating the information suggests that most of the admixture is maternally derived.

  249. @Anon7
    It's not just the government that uses race constantly. I have lots of friends who are very liberal doctors and it's great fun to watch the cognitive dissonance when they excoriate you for mentioning race like it's real (not a social construct) and then I point out that physicians use race and ethnicity and national origin constantly when they screen patients for colon cancer, lactose intolerance and so forth.

    Not so much for colon cancer, and lactose intolerance is complicated (some non-European herder populations from sub-Saharan Africa and the Middle East are lactose tolerant). But definitely true for sickle cell anemia, alpha and beta-thalassemia, cystic fibrosis, Tay Sachs, Gaucher’s disease, etc.

  250. @iffen
    insane ranting “Joos are out to destroy Western Civilization” / Protocols of the Elders of Zion type commenters here?

    They are called anti-Semites.

    iffen: They are called anti-Semites.

    Sorry iffen,

    It is the Ashkenazi Jews who are the world’s greatest anti-Semites. They hate the Arabs and look down on the ME Jews as inferiors. There is a cast system in Israel.

    Truth — Art

    p.s. Every time YOU start putting down people for being group haters – all they have to do is look at Israel for a worst example.

  251. @Boethiuss
    "Meanwhile, we also know that the MSM will fabricate anything, which means it’s entirely reasonable to suspect that the media and allied pollsters will fabricate polling data."

    As it pertains to the current polling data (or mainstream polling data as an aggregate), this is just ignorant. Pollsters can make mistakes, they can also fall to groupthink, but in general at least they are not fabricating.

    Actually, it is this that is remarkably ignorant.

    The media and the establishment are all against Trump because he has made himself their enemy, not just because he has hurt their and your cuck feelings.

    Never underestimate the deviousness of the rulers. The powerful are not at heart meek weaklings

  252. anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    “The Korean War was a series of mistakes made by the men — Stalin, MacArthur, Mao — who had emerged from the 1940s as huge winners. It’s depressing and alarming to read up on the Korean War.”

    It’s depressing that even the most intelligent humans probably aren’t very intelligent. Even more depressing is the thought that there might be fairly low limits on the ultimate bounds of intelligence, kind of the equivalent of the speed of light or the sound barrier. If a large component of intelligence is about prediction, but past a certain point things just can’t be predicted, well… you can’t learn something that’s inherently random, and so on.

  253. @Discordiax
    Pretty sure, pre-Tiger, dumb rednecks thought blacks were bad at golf because they couldn't afford club memberships.

    Ask Sailer, there used to be a bunch of black golf pros who grew up with part-time jobs as caddies.

    From 1961-1986 or so, five different black golf pros won a total of 23 PGA tournaments. Also, blacks were doing well on the Senior Tour in the decade before Tiger arrived.

  254. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    I’d like to see that guy explain that races don’t exist to the forensic experts working for the FBI:

    http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/lab/forensic-science-communications/fsc/oct2004/case/2004_10_case01.htm

    “Ancestry was assessed by gross cranial morphology. Craniofacial features (broad face, nasal overgrowth, projecting zygomatics, blurred nasal sill, large teeth, and edge-to-edge bite) are characteristic of an individual of indigenous ancestry, and notably not of African origin (Bass 1995; Krogman and Iscan 1986; Rhine 1990).”

    http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/lab/forensic-science-communications/fsc/jan2001/phillips.htm

    “The skull was analyzed metrically to determine the age, race, and sex of the victim. The anatomical features of the skull were determined to be of mixed racial origin, containing Khoisanoid, Negroid, and Caucasoid features (Figure 16).”

    http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/lab/forensic-science-communications/fsc/july2000/deedric1.htm

    “Forensic examiners differentiate between hairs of Caucasoid (European ancestry), Mongoloid (Asian ancestry), and Negroid (African ancestry) origin, all of which exhibit microscopic characteristics that distinguish one racial group from another.”

  255. @Discordiax
    Pretty sure, pre-Tiger, dumb rednecks thought blacks were bad at golf because they couldn't afford club memberships.

    Ask Sailer, there used to be a bunch of black golf pros who grew up with part-time jobs as caddies.

    Jim Dent, Lee Elder and Calvin Peete obviously lived (and played golf) in vain.

  256. @Hubbub
    Writers like Feldman who laud the benefits of diversity, always fail to show convincingly why it's such a good thing, other than nebulous reasons of little virtue. Many of us ask the question of diversity, Why? What purpose does it serve? Who benefits? Who loses? Does the good outweigh the bad? What is the greater good from having different peoples and cultures clash? Isn't it possible that we've been through this before - in some past time, some past age - maybe, diversity clashes are why people are spread out to the four corners of the globe, inhabiting a set region for a particular people - Whites in Europe, Yellows in Asia, Blacks in Africa, etc.

    I certainly hope that the world doesn't blend into a turd brown of mediocrity - why, heaven forbid - but this seems to be the 'diversifiers' end goal - the opposite of what preach - a world without diversity.

    I certainly hope that the world doesn’t blend into a turd brown of mediocrity – why, heaven forbid – but this seems to be the ‘diversifiers’ end goal – the opposite of what preach – a world without diversity.

    That’s the supreme irony. The goal of diversity is to destroy diversity. Diversity is the most racist ideology ever promulgated.

    But at least it’s fair. Every single culture will end up getting trashed.

    • Replies: @ben tillman

    That’s the supreme irony. The goal of diversity is to destroy diversity. Diversity is the most racist ideology ever promulgated.

    But at least it’s fair. Every single culture will end up getting trashed.
     
    Which is another way of saying we're dealing with misanthropy, is it not?
  257. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @ben tillman

    Like I said, it’s personal with you. He disputed an issue that has moral significance to you.
     
    That's not what "personal" means. What you might say is that I was paying attention when Razib revealed that, for him, politics trumps science.

    Regardless of one’s position on Salter’s views, Salter himself states at the outset of his work that he’s not attempting to describe how biological organisms actually behave, which means he’s taking a controversial meta position that’s open to dispute.
     
    It means nothing of the sort. He wasn't talking about "how biological organisms actually behave". He simply pointed out the cost of being invaded and replaced and advised that people not allow themselves to be invaded and replaced. He pointed out that this prescription was universalizable and suggested a policy of non-aggressive "universal nationalism".

    He disagreed with something that has moral significance to you. People take things personally when their deeply held moral beliefs are disputed.

    Of course Salter from the outset takes a controversial meta position that’s open to dispute. A physicist who says that he is making various claims but not attempting to describe how physical bodies actually behave is doing the same thing.

    • Replies: @ben tillman
    That's not what "personal" means, and nothing he said is open to dispute. What do you base such a claim on?
  258. @Anonymous
    He disagreed with something that has moral significance to you. People take things personally when their deeply held moral beliefs are disputed.

    Of course Salter from the outset takes a controversial meta position that’s open to dispute. A physicist who says that he is making various claims but not attempting to describe how physical bodies actually behave is doing the same thing.

    That’s not what “personal” means, and nothing he said is open to dispute. What do you base such a claim on?

  259. @dfordoom

    I certainly hope that the world doesn’t blend into a turd brown of mediocrity – why, heaven forbid – but this seems to be the ‘diversifiers’ end goal – the opposite of what preach – a world without diversity.
     
    That's the supreme irony. The goal of diversity is to destroy diversity. Diversity is the most racist ideology ever promulgated.

    But at least it's fair. Every single culture will end up getting trashed.

    That’s the supreme irony. The goal of diversity is to destroy diversity. Diversity is the most racist ideology ever promulgated.

    But at least it’s fair. Every single culture will end up getting trashed.

    Which is another way of saying we’re dealing with misanthropy, is it not?

  260. @Steve Sailer
    The Korean War was a series of mistakes made by the men -- Stalin, MacArthur, Mao -- who had emerged from the 1940s as huge winners. It's depressing and alarming to read up on the Korean War.

    Steve, I noticed this seemingly stray comment, and feel that it reflects a general view that I had always assumed to be correct, but now think is probably wrong. In Chang and Halliday’s Mao: The Unknown Story, the authors make a strong case that the idea that the Korean War was all a mistake simply ignores Stalin’s and, particularly, Mao’s objectives. Far from starting and escalating due to US mistakes, the war was intended by Stalin to tie up the US far from Europe, so as to protect Stalin’s control in eastern Europe. Mao provided the cannon fodder in return for a Soviet-constructed arms industry. The war destroyed the PLA as an alternative power to Mao and the CP. The war ended because Stalin died and no more Soviet assistance to China was forthcoming.

    The standard interpretation produces analysis like this (from the History.com website):

    In late June 1950, it became apparent that the Soviet action had backfired when the issue of North Korea’s invasion of South Korea was brought before the Security Council. By June 27, the Security Council voted to invoke military action by the United Nations for the first time in the organization’s history. The Soviets could have blocked the action in the Security Council, since the United States, Soviet Union, China, Britain, and France each had absolute veto power, but no Russian delegate was present. In just a short time, a multinational U.N. force arrived in South Korea and the grueling three-year Korean War was underway.

    In retrospect do you want to bet that the Soviet UN representative, Ambassador Brerabitov, I believe, actually let the Truman administration slip something past them?

  261. @Jack D
    Every source I've ever seen says that she was. Do you have any source for this?

    I don't think this is like the US where having a little Cherokee in you is glamorous - if it is in the matrilineal line it may mean that you aren't Jewish at all.

    What “sources” are these?

    The claim for Sharon’s Subbotnik ancestry seems to have popped up on the internet in the 2010s, and then was reprinted in a couple of newspapers, yes, largely in “Lists of famous Subbotniks” and the like.

    I don’t think any full-length bio of Sharon says so, nor do I think Sharon ever said so himself. So where is this coming from?

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    Perhaps from novelist Amos Oz's semi-fictional portrait of a "Jewish Nazi" Israeli general/politician?
  262. @Bee
    What "sources" are these?

    The claim for Sharon's Subbotnik ancestry seems to have popped up on the internet in the 2010s, and then was reprinted in a couple of newspapers, yes, largely in "Lists of famous Subbotniks" and the like.

    I don't think any full-length bio of Sharon says so, nor do I think Sharon ever said so himself. So where is this coming from?

    Perhaps from novelist Amos Oz’s semi-fictional portrait of a “Jewish Nazi” Israeli general/politician?

  263. @Anonymous
    It's sort of unfair to class someone like hbdchick with figures like Sailer or Razib Khan. hbdchick is a nice person but not really erudite or sharp enough to be classed with them.

    There are ideas and conversations hbd chick has introduced that are both informative and would never have been raised by Steve. There is room for lots of people following their interests, thinking about things, and discussing them.

  264. @Steve Richter

    Would you say that the difference in height between men and women cannot be genetic? After all, there is such a wide (and overlapping) range.
     
    Selecting for intelligence seems different that for other traits. Humans are the only animals that have increased their intelligence over evolutionary time. ( assuming that current day humans are smarter than the ones who migrated from Africa. ) Just thinking that before we accept that HBD has produced an increase in intelligence there has to be an explanation for why no other species has evolved greater intelligence

    What? Are you saying dogs, dolhins, chimps, crows and elephants are no more intelligent than the first organism?

  265. @Jack D
    The Khazar thing was just slander to make HBDer's sound tin foil hattish and nutsy. It was like assuming (before Trump killed that meme) that all Republicans were holy rolling Christian fundamentalists. You have to look at these things from inside the coastal urban sophisticate bubble - he is looking for things that will enable him to dismiss you (and enable his friends and readers to dismiss you) as an unserious person and not an intellectual equal whose arguments need to be taken seriously. Meanwhile, someone like Sabrina Rubin Erdely is automatically entitled to the benefit of the doubt even if she writes about rapes on broken glass tables in the dark, because she is one of them.

    “Intellectual equal”? That hack can’t hold a candle to Mr. Sailer.

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS